Re: DB2 Crushes Oracle RAC on TPC-C benchmark

>"Mark Townsend" <markbtownsend_at_comcast.net> wrote in message
news:VaSdnQC8r-CH3WHcRVn-qw_at_comcast.com...
>
> My point was that at one time IBM had a business argument that said 4 or
> 8 way machines clustered together was an interesting architectural
> choice. They no longer seem to say this.
>

IBM still says it works well for decision support systems using parallel database (partitioned). There is a big difference between an optimal configuration for TPC-C and TPC-H.

It also works well for scientific computing (such as predicting the weather) if you have an application that utilizes parallel architecture in its processing.

> > HA is relevant to this discussion because the main advantage of Oracle
RAC
> > is high availability,
>
> Why do you make this claim ? I ask because you have previously
> acknowledged that this is not the main advantage at all, at least, as
> claimed by Oracle. I quote
>
> "Oracle markets RAC as an architecture that scales well with lots of cheap
> nodes in an OLTP environment."
>
> You are obviously aware of the value proposition. So I guess you are
> discounting this as not true/realizable somehow ? If so, why ?
>

It appears that for OLTP (TPC-C) that IBM/DB2 has produced some impressive results in performance and scalability on a single node.

Scalability for OLTP using multiple nodes is difficult because it cannot use a true share nothing architecture.

> > 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.
>
> Pure hokum. In this case it's the outsourcing company that is not cost
> competitive, not the RAC deployment. Time to get a better outsourcing
> company.
>

I am just telling you what I have seen. I am not talking just about RAC, but any multi-node environment. The cost of ownership for multiple nodes is always higher than one node, and there is no way the multi-node will cheaper no matter which outsourcing company you use. Received on Sat Jan 29 2005 - 20:14:35 CST