Re: Hardware Recommendations for new Oracle Server

"Colin McKinnon" <colin_at_EditMeOutUnlessYoureABot.wew.co.uk> wrote

> > 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
 

> 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.

I tend to agree with you. There are many areas where Unix is far superior from a practical administration perspective. However, on the reliability issue, it has very little to do with operating system.

Do not intend for this thread to deteriorate in another "which is the best o/s?" discussion, but I have used various Unix flavours and NT in production environments.. running what the business people call corporate critical applications.

I have seen my share of problems with both Unix and NT. Without one being worse ito reliability than the other. To me the bottomline is administration. Good sys admins for NT is hard to find as most of these sys admins are young kids with MCP qualifications and never walked the hard road of experience that Unix sys admins did. I contribute this to many of the so-called realibility problems there are with NT. Simple clueless sods doing the driving.

> 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.

Yep. But then I do not see an Intel-based solution delivering the same performance, scalebility and power. :-)

> 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?

There is a lot of FUD around NT. And most of this I contribute to Unix supporters and ignorance about using NT as a production platform. One should not sell NT short, nor Microsoft's ability to assimilate new technologies into their products.

I agree that NT as a high-end server platform, is somewhat dubious. IMO NT and Intel still need to prove them in this regard. But by the same token, I have seen NT being used as a corporate platform and deliver. At the end of the day, I think it comes down to us - the people responsible for development, implementation and administration - and how good we can wield these tools.

One never blame the paintbrush for poor artwork. It is the artist who does the painting. IMO it is the same when using NT or Unix, or Oracle or Informix.. the reliability of the system, the ability to meet the business demands, depends on how well we wield these tools and very seldom on the tools itself. Granted, a sculptor will not use a paintbrush to chip away at a granite block. So you need to use the right tools. But that does not mean that Unix is the only tool that can deliver.. or Oracle is the only database that can do the job.

--
Billy