Re: Best chip for Oracle AMD, INTEL, SPARC

On Jul 11, 4:02 pm, "awatkins1..._at_googlemail.com" <awatkins1..._at_googlemail.com> wrote:
> I know you are going to say that it all depends on the O/S, but if you
> can forget that for the minute, does it matter what the CPU is when
> your are compare the Intel Xeon Quads, AMD Quads and Sun SPARC chips.
>
> Does the cache make a big difference, since you think then SPARC /
> INTEL would be best and you would never consider AMD.
>
>   SPARC T2        =   4 MB  L2
>   UltraSPARC IV  =   2MB L2
>   INTEL Xeon       =   2MB L2
>   AMD Opteron     =   512K L2
>
> Cheers
>
> Andrew

Tons of books about Oracle performance, and this discussion about different cache sizes is almost non-existent in this. Seems that there are much bigger fish to catch when it comes to an optimised system.

Having said that, i have seen a relation between hardware specifications and oracle performance tuning. If the hardware is very good, the performance of oracle is often very bad. This relation ( hey, let's call it Helma's Law ) is due to the fact that some uninformed people tend to buy very good hardware if the performance of the database is bad.
I've seen a few good running Oracle's on hardware that wasn't topshelve. I haven't seen a good oracle DBA yet who claimed that the hardware specifications needed to be improved.

Ok, my HELMA's LAW :

" The better the hardware, the lesser the optimalisation of the oracle performance"

hmm. Perhaps a native speaker can improve this a bit. Is this correct English anyway?
H. Received on Fri Jul 11 2008 - 10:00:56 CDT