Re: DB2 Crushes Oracle RAC on TPC-C benchmark

> The IBM SP2 (or more
> > accurately, DB2 partitioned databases)
>
> I'm sorry, but you have now completely lost me. How did we get to DB2
> partitioned databases ? And why is HA now relevant to this discussion ?
> (although I have long pushed internally for definition of an HA benchmark)
>

SP2 is nothing more than multiple nodes in a rack with an optional high speed switch between the nodes. The high speed switch was particularly important before gigabit Ethernet, but not quite so important now unless using partitioned databases. So I assumed you were talking about partitioned databases when you mentioned the SP2. Of course, one can run Oracle RAC on an SP2, if that is what you meant.

HA is relevant to this discussion because the main advantage of Oracle RAC is high availability, although it is not continuous availability by any measure. I think that the latest IBM benchmarks have shown that a single node SMP machine can scale quit well in an OLTP environment, even better than the 16 node HP machine used for the Oracle benchmark.

When considering cost of ownership, the single node cost versus the 16 node cost should not be overlooked. Many outsourcing companies charge by node for administration services (network, UNIX admin, and DB admin). Normally they charge about $1000 per month per node, regardless of node size. So unless one is using RAC for its HA benefits, it is probably not cost competitive. Received on Sat Jan 29 2005 - 19:14:30 CST