Re: ORACLE ON NT SERVER vs. UNIX

In article <6qdb1p$bid$1_at_garnet.tc.umn.edu>,   hause011_at_garnet.tc.umn.edu (Steven Hauser) wrote:
>
> The phoney baloney test of using creaky old unix on a puny old box against a
> bunch of 4 CPU NT boxes is the usual way of rigging results.
>
> NT at this time does not scale, is unstable, is expensive. Face the
> facts squarely and present a reasonable test. No one in their right
> mind would ever pick an NT box for something that is bigger than a
> GB or two of data or needs 24x7 run time.
>
> I laugh at your lame 'test'. HAH.
>
> --

Thats funny, I've been testing NT for several months and pushing to its limits. I've been using some 'creaky' old NT boxes and I am able to use Oracle8's Advanced replication to easily push 1 million transactions (only using 3 tables I admit) to a secondary box. In addition, I have been testing FULL TIME Software's (formerly Qualix) Octopus product to provide failover. No problems so far after 3-4 months of testing many senarios. CPU usage is at a minimun and I could push even more than this if I cared to.

I expect I can do even better when our quad Xeon processors are set up. I plan on using it for a 24x7 operation (although the db will be small.)

If you are basing your objections to NT on something real, like tests you have done, then please share your experiences with the group. Otherwise, please avoid childish games of "My OS can beat up your OS."

-Frank

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==----- http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum Received on Fri Aug 07 1998 - 08:33:19 CDT