Re: PC server vs. Sun server

Hi,

In general you can't say this platform is better than that one. It all depends on the business needs you have. I've used Oracle on SUN6000's and smaller (all Solaris), on Intel platform (Netware, NT and Solaris).

I still advise small shops to use NT if unix expertise is not available. Where scalability is NOT an issue, other reasons might.

Right now I'm sort of looking after 650 (remote) sites with Oracle on Intel Solaris ranging from Pentium 60 to 133Mhz, running almost unattended.

I'm investigating the use of the Oracle Intelligent Agent with Oracle Enterprise Manager and SUN's master agent. The idea is to have the database alerts trapped by the master agent, which takes care of sending it via snmp over the wan to the Solstice Enterprise Manager.

remarks:
1. If the db crawls on a dual proc Proliant, you might reconsider your design
2. The OracleI installed on Netware was very fast Unix couldn't beat it on similar hardware.
3. A Proliant is hardly a Personal Computer anymore

Cheers

On 7 Dec 1997 03:08:02 GMT, elethe_at_gte.net (David A. Lethe) wrote:

>On Sat, 06 Dec 1997 00:18:54 GMT, gedau_at_isa.mim.com.au (George Dau)
>wrote:
>
>>"David Russell" <user_at_msn.com> wrote:
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>]From a number of benchmarks I have been involved in, if the Hardware is of
>>]the same specification, then Oracle on NT is usually slightly faster up to
>>]about 3 CPU's after that UNIX is the answer. By Hardware of the same
>>]specification I mean; e.g both machines have the same number and type of
>>]disks.
>>
>>That's the first time I have heard anyone make that claim. Very certainly I
>>have found Oracle on NT to be slower than on Solaris. I haven't been able to
>>make comparisons with the same hardware though. A small Oracle database with 20
>>concurrent (client/server) users crawls on NT on a dual CPU 128 Meg RAM Compaq
>>Proliant.
>>
>>A 10 Gig Database with usually 150 concurrent users gives < 2 second response
>>times on a Sun 1000e with 512 Meg and 4 X 50 Meg CPUs (yes, 50 Meg CPUs).
>>
>>Even our smaller databases on Sparc 10s and 20s are faster than the small NT
>>one.
>>
>I strongly agree. If choosing between SUN & NT, then you would pretty
>much have to get your head examined if you thought NT would be the
>better way to go.
>
>PC stands for Personal Computer for a reason!
>
>>]
>>]Oracle 8 uses more memory than Oracle 7 so be sure to size memory correctly
>>]and most large systems I have encountered have I/O bottlenecks rather than
>>]CPU. So be sure to calculate your I/O through put requirements and compare
>>]them with what the Hardware can achieve.
>>]
>>]Regards
>>]David Russell
>>
>>--
>> ,-,_|\ George Dau, __
>>/ * \ Unix (Solaris, DEC Unix, Linux), NT, Oracle, Internet. (OO)
>>\_,--\_/ Home: gedau_at_pobox.com Work: gedau_at_mim.com.au ( \/ )
>> v WWW: http://pobox.com/~gedau W--W
>>
>>Food for spambots:
>>webmaster_at_SendAd.com suggest_at_SendAd.com onwave_at_mlmail.com
>>chrysties_at_mymail.com postmaster_at_anka.von.mute.de
>>dan_at_netinstrument.com justdoit_at_ultra-mail.com osg_at_online-success.com
>>mrk_at_sympatico.ca chandar_at_powerup.com.au 18384_fred_at_ultra.net
>>TALN_at_andromeda.jaycounty.com MANAGER1_at_MLMPRO.NET
>>market_at_smithparnell.com gameZONE_at_letterbox.com cheq2_at_hotmail.com
>>sales_at_morbrandnames.com quu93_at_flashnet.it jlm_at_ic-asia.com
>>FREE_at_lexus.hkg.com ace_at_max.net mankani_at_singnet.com.sg PEEL_at_sis-ltd.com
>>CEO_at_sis-ltd.com putpeel_at_putpeel.com 195_mail_at_earthlink.net
>>BdavidC_at_aaanews.com tootoogood_at_hotmail.com Remove_at_iemmc.org
Received on Tue Dec 09 1997 - 00:00:00 CST