Re: Oracle Performance on HP vs Sun ?

Careful now...

You should always be careful to compare apples with apples and nothing else! Base prices on their own don't tell you how much hardware and software you have to add to a system to make it perform properly or account for software licenses, etc. The only direct comparisons that can be made for databases is on TPC figures (see below).

Even then you can only compare TPC-C figures with TPC-C figures and then again only at the same rev of the benchmark. (v2.0 in this case)

        System tpmC $/tpmC Total Cost

	HP 800/E35	 401.07		$1895		  $759,865
	HP 800/H40	 406.65		$2547		$1,035,773
	Sun SS1000	1079.43		$1032		$1,113,952
	

Note that the SPARCserver 1000 is available *NOW* and has been shipping for getting on for 9 months. The E35 only started shipping 1st March 94 apparently.

You can draw your own conclusions from the list above! :-)         

I can't see that an internal backup device can make anything intrinsically more reliable. Most devices have to be cabled in some way or other.

So to say that an HP running an Oracle database would kick Sun's butt is totally misleading. Sun has one of the *largest* (if not largest) Oracle 7 sites in the world - in excess of 240GB.

Tim

---