Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: DB2 Crushes Oracle RAC on TPC-C benchmark

Re: DB2 Crushes Oracle RAC on TPC-C benchmark

From: DA Morgan <>
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 16:27:13 -0800
Message-ID: <1107390271.489786@yasure>

Noons wrote:

> DA Morgan wrote:

>>But the real advantage was that we knew we wouldn't need a
>>forklift in the future. Here's the most important part of the
>>RAC savings.
>>Development ... one cluster with 2 nodes.
>>Testing ... one cluster with 2 nodes.
>>Production ... one cluster with 2 nodes initially.
>>as the need for more resources increases ... add more nodes
>>one at a time. Keeps the cost of hardware in line with need
>>and revenues. And as you add new nodes with faster CPUs the
>>load balancing improves performance.
> Bingo!  How true.

>>The SMP alternative is to either day one purchase two boxes
>>big enough to handle the anticipated requirement 2+ years in the
>>future or expect to have to forklift out the current box after
>>one or so years (which will then worth only a fraction of its
>>original cost as it will be obsolete) and replace it with two
>>brand new bigger boxes.
>>Try to sell a CFO on buying to very large computers, one of
>>which will hopefully never be utilized ... just sit there
>>idling in backup mode ... with all of the costs up front versus
>>buying commodity hardware on an as-needed basis with the
>>changes over time in hardware performance benefiting the
>>overall ROI.
> Precisely.  This is also what I'm seeing on my end.
> RAC makes it much easier to start with just enough resources
> and then expand as needed and as the needs evolve.
> I've lost count of the number of times in the past where this
> situation has occurred: sites buy huge hardware upfront which
> then sits idle doing development for years, and then is
> undersized when production finally hits.
> If anything has the potential to make RAC take off,
> it's this.  The cost spread is so much better it's not
> even comparable.

>>I've yet to see meet the CFO, when shown the numbers, that
>>didn't make that decision for the IT folks using a very large
> Ah yes.  But they've been doing that for a long time.
> The only difference with RAC is they're actually
> doing the right thing.  For once...

Which taking it full circle ... means that Larry and Oracle are delivering something worth the price of admission.

And not to restart the flame idiocy ... it is the one part of the story other vendor's solutions can't touch ... the ability to increment the hardware and with new hardware load-balance to higher productivity. The DB2 solution, for example, can only be as fast as the slowest machine.

Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
Received on Wed Feb 02 2005 - 18:27:13 CST

Original text of this message