DA Morgan wrote:
> Chuck wrote:
>> DA Morgan wrote:
>>> JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>>> On 2006-06-20, Chuck <skilover_nospam_at_bluebottle.com> wrote:
>>>>> DA Morgan wrote:
>>>>>> Here are some of the more obvious advantages.
>>>>>> 4. Incremental scalability
>>>>> Is the scalability any closer to linear than it was with OPS in 8i
>>>>> or is
>>>>> there still a fairly low point of diminishing returns?
>>>> RAC is MUCH better.
>>>>
>>>> In many cases, RAC scales better than NUMA.
>>>>
>>>> Oracle re-engineered the part of OPS that sucked so badly.
>>> Oracle's published RAC scaling number is 84%. That is roughly what
>>> I have seen in my lab too: Usually a bit better.
>>
>> So if scalability were your main concern, what benefit is there to RAC
>> over say, adding more CPU's to the server?
>
> Let me give you H/P's own numbers published, IIRC, by Vic Andrade
> (vic.andrade_at_hp.com).
>
> ===============================================
> Add 2 850 MHz procs and 2GB RAM quoted at $150K (add to 10 CPUs)
>
> Add dual 3.0 GHz server w/4GB RAM quoted at $24K (add a 2 CPU node)
> ===============================================
>
> The price difference more than makes up for the cost of the additional
> RAC license to Oracle.
>
> Obviously the price of the new node, with current pricing would be
> less than $24K. I think you will find the pricing adding 2 CPUs to
> an existing 8+ CPU box is still very very high.
Thanks. I don't get into the pricing aspect of things any more. Thant's
handled elsewhere but it's very good to know.
Received on Thu Jun 22 2006 - 08:46:26 CDT
