Re: Sorry, but...
From: joel garry <joel-garry_at_home.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 16:17:15 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <789263ad-6555-4f1c-91d0-df48dbb28290_at_g41g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>
On Jan 10, 2:35 pm, TheBoss <TheB..._at_invalid.nl> wrote:
> onedbguru <onedbg..._at_yahoo.com> wrote innews:5f2ea3dd-d880-482e-91a0-474b4cb9ded7_at_k5g2000vba.googlegroups.com:
>
>
>
> > On Jan 9, 10:28 pm, Noons <wizofo..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> > the MV3100's mentioned in the paper) that were used in the effort.
>
> >> <yawn>
>
> >> another ex-RDB "expert" telling us how good it was way back when.
> >> There is a reason DEC and RDB are gone into history, deal with it.
> >> And it has nothing to do with the competence or otherwise of the
> >> folks using/not using it.
>
> > Maybe so, but without DEC and Rdb, most of the technology used in RAC,
> > and RDBMS itself would still be floundering as it did prior to the Rdb
> > purchase which is why Larry bought it in the first place - and then
> > licensed the cluster technology out of Tru64 from HP. I won't "bore"
> > you with all of the other technologies that DEC either designed or
> > brought to market that makes the technology world what it is today...
> > but, you can start with ethernet(collaborative effort) and 64bit
> > computing. DEC had marketing problems which showed in their decision-
> > making processes - but had really great engineering - hardware and
> > software - down to their chip design and manufacturing. Oh well, back
> > to the present.
>
> Show me in which year DEC "designed or brought to market" 64bit
> computing, and I'll show you some (non-DEC) examples from a (much)
> earlier date...
>
> --
> Jeroen
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 16:17:15 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <789263ad-6555-4f1c-91d0-df48dbb28290_at_g41g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>
On Jan 10, 2:35 pm, TheBoss <TheB..._at_invalid.nl> wrote:
> onedbguru <onedbg..._at_yahoo.com> wrote innews:5f2ea3dd-d880-482e-91a0-474b4cb9ded7_at_k5g2000vba.googlegroups.com:
>
>
>
> > On Jan 9, 10:28 pm, Noons <wizofo..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> > the MV3100's mentioned in the paper) that were used in the effort.
>
> >> <yawn>
>
> >> another ex-RDB "expert" telling us how good it was way back when.
> >> There is a reason DEC and RDB are gone into history, deal with it.
> >> And it has nothing to do with the competence or otherwise of the
> >> folks using/not using it.
>
> > Maybe so, but without DEC and Rdb, most of the technology used in RAC,
> > and RDBMS itself would still be floundering as it did prior to the Rdb
> > purchase which is why Larry bought it in the first place - and then
> > licensed the cluster technology out of Tru64 from HP. I won't "bore"
> > you with all of the other technologies that DEC either designed or
> > brought to market that makes the technology world what it is today...
> > but, you can start with ethernet(collaborative effort) and 64bit
> > computing. DEC had marketing problems which showed in their decision-
> > making processes - but had really great engineering - hardware and
> > software - down to their chip design and manufacturing. Oh well, back
> > to the present.
>
> Show me in which year DEC "designed or brought to market" 64bit
> computing, and I'll show you some (non-DEC) examples from a (much)
> earlier date...
>
> --
> Jeroen
Yeah, but all those were either supercomputers or intended for vector graphics or with some 32 bit parts or just generally considered unsuccessful. DEC Alpha was really the first purely 64 bit for our more general db purposes, SGI is probably the only argument against it, and just barely, 20 years ago. Ethernet is a Xerox patent, but he did say collaborative. I was a DECNET admin at one time...
jg
-- _at_home.com is bogus. http://www.eweek.com/c/a/IT-Infrastructure/Oracle-Launches-ClouderaPowered-Big-Data-Appliance-172364/Received on Tue Jan 10 2012 - 18:17:15 CST