Comments in line.
--
Regards
Jonathan Lewis
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk
Next Seminar dates:
(see http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/seminar.html )
____USA__________November 7/9 (MI), 19/21 (TX)
____England______November 12/14
The Co-operative Oracle Users' FAQ
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/faq/ind_faq.html
tingl wrote in message ...
>Connor McDonald <connor_mcdonald_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:<3D9889BB.6634_at_yahoo.com>...
>>
>> Running SAP on Win2K, user base about 2000, concurrent users about 300,
>> concurrent db connections (since SAP pools them) about 100.
>>
>> No problems - runs an absolute treat.
>>
This seems to have achieved a reasonable degree of scalability - and
running SAP, too !
>> The real importance is the gear you buy. I have no doubt that if we
>> were running Unix on the gear we've got, it would probably be faster,
>> but the Win2k has been up since about July - no reboots, crashes
>>
Clearly a guy who knows how to get Oracle to work well.
>I would not recommend running a 500GB database on W2K for three reasons.
>
>1. Scalability
>2. Scalability
>3. Scalability
Funny, I would have said that 300 concurrent users through 100 pooled
connections showed a reasonable degree of scalability. Maybe if the
500 GB is distributed over enough spindles there won't be a problem.
And if he puts it on just 8 spindles it will be a problem whatever O/S
he uses.
Frankly, I wouldn't put in a comment like yours without some concrete
backup as a response to some real-life statistics that prove you fairly
close to wrong.
Received on Tue Oct 01 2002 - 02:57:48 CDT
