Re: Hardware Recommendations for new Oracle Server

Billy Verreynne <vslabs_at_onwe.co.za> wrote in message news:9k87c4$shf$1_at_ctb-nnrp2.saix.net...
> "W. Scott Moore" <sirws_at_hotmail.com> wrote
>
> > The lease on my current server is coming up, and I am working on trying
 to
> > spec out a new machine.

 <snipped>
> > Our organization is an HP shop, and I was looking at an N Class
> > server with 4 550MHz processors and 16 GB of RAM. Any comments? Does
> > anyone recommend not using HP?
>
> Ignoring the price, the HP machines are fine work horses. We have both N
 and L
> class boxes and the new L class one I'm playing with is pretty fast.

Me too. I'd definitley consider a fully decked L class as well.

<snip>
> So if a Win2K based platform can address the business needs that a Unix
 platform
> can not (given budget constraints, available skills and resources, etc.),
 then
> use it. And don't let anyone tell you any different - unless there is a
 damn
> good reason why using Win2K will not be able to address the business
> requirements due to some serious technical issue or flaw.

Still not convinced about the reliability thing. And as for automating the administration (e.g. backups etc) I don't think NT can hold a candle to Unix.

Certainly an HP PA box of the spec you mention will be many times more expensive than a PC based architecture of comparable spec / performance.

One way to get the best of both worlds is to use one of the Unixen available for PC based systems. BSD and Linux are at least as good as most commercial Unixen at the level you seem to be operating in terms of stability and reliability. There are still some issues with scalability at the high end, and the hysteria regarding support - like Bill Gates is going to re-write Windows NT because you found a bug in it? Plus of course Caldera's various flavours of Unix.

HTH Colin Received on Thu Aug 02 2001 - 08:09:19 CDT