Re: Upgrade to big SUN box or RAC for data warehouse?

I'm sorry, but the advice of looking at a completely different product is not going to help this individual. ;) TeraData can suffer from I/O (and other) bottlenecks just as well. Until one isolates the problem, one can't determine the best resolution. This is similar to the argument of just throwing bigger/faster hardware (more memory, faster CPUs, etc.) at the problem. That's not always the answer.

If you suspect that RAC only provided small increases in performance, then I'd suggest that you didn't adequately analyze your bottlenecks and that RAC was not the solution to your problems anyway. RAC will not solve all bottlenecks. Therefore, implementing RAC may not lead to big increases in performance. Does that mean that Teradata is the answer? Not necessarily. One cannot know until the bottlenecks are known.

Cheers,
Brian

dick wrote:
>
> Take a look at TeraData product from NCR.
>
> RAC may provide small increases in performance. If you need huge increases
> then you likely need a diferent solution. We are currently an Oracle shop,
> but are investigating TeraData for 1 specific problem.
>
> "Brian Peasland" <dba_at_remove_spam.peasland.com> wrote in message
> news:3F1D3B15.7B6DCD3F_at_remove_spam.peasland.com...
> > Before you invest heavily in multiple servers with RAC, you might want
> > to get to the bottom of what your bottleneck is. RAC will not solve your
> > I/O problems. In some circumstances, RAC can make your I/O problems even
> > worse. If I/O is your problem, look at your SQL queries. Try to reduce
> > your physical reads. Also look at the disk subsystem. Are your disks
> > older and slower? Do you have disk contention that could be solved by
> > spreading the I/O load among multiple disks. You mentioned NAS. This can
> > be bad for performance since the disk I/O has to go across the network.
> > Direct attached disks or a SAN can help with your performance. In the
> > end, I'm just not convinced that RAC will solve your problems unless you
> > also solve the other things.
> >
> > HTH,
> > Brian
> >
> > Larry wrote:
> > >
> > > Our DW is running out of steam (Terabyte Database using Oracle 8) with
> > > Sun Enterprise 10000 box. Choices are to upgrade to a F12K or go RAC
> > > (we need to go to 9i anyway). I suspect many of the problems in the
> > > DW are due to poor IO throughput in the load, less so in the running
> > > of queries. Poor throughput since the IO system in the 10K box is not
> > > fast enough to ship data out to the NAS
> > >
> > > I am quite keen on looking at RAC with perhaps a bunch of SUN V280 or
> > > 480's perhaps connected over GBE to NAS storage but others say that
> > > isn't a good architecture for a data warehouse and we need to buy big
> > > iron.
> > >
> > > All the literature I can find suggests that clustering is a good thing
> > > - especially if you can parallel the load across multiple CPU's access
> > > the NAS over the network fabric. If you have one machine (no matter
> > > how many CPU's) aren't you then limited to the IO path that box has to
> > > the NAS? Plus large joins etc. could be dispersed to a number of
> > > different boxes for higher speed?
> > >
> > > Any general ROT's here or is it quite application specific?
> > >
> > > thanks
> > >
> > > Larry
> >
> > --
> > ===================================================================
> >
> > Brian Peasland
> > dba_at_remove_spam.peasland.com
> >
> > Remove the "remove_spam." from the email address to email me.
> >
> >
> > "I can give it to you cheap, quick, and good. Now pick two out of
> > the three"

-- 
===================================================================

Brian Peasland
dba_at_remove_spam.peasland.com

Remove the "remove_spam." from the email address to email me.


"I can give it to you cheap, quick, and good. Now pick two out of
 the three"