Re: Oracle Performance on HP vs Sun ?

Richard,

Apologies. Correct I am confusing Sun's Oracle TPC-A figures with Sun's TPC-C figures!

However, as yet no one has done any TPC-C figures with Oracle. All the published UNIX figures are with Informix. So as such the comparison is still valid.

	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

You asked which version of the operating system Sun ran the TPC-C tests on. Well the answer for all Sun's latest TPC results is Solaris 2.3. This provides the MP scaleability to achieve such numbers.

If you want to look at some Oracle numbers and use TPC-A (which seems to get away from the original argument to which I was responding) then the following numbers have been published (to my knowledge).

System			tpsA		$/tpsA		OS		RDBMS


------			----		------		--		-----


SPARCcentre 2000	 734.1		 $5,346		Solaris 2.3	Oracle 7
NCR 3555        	 713.56		 $5,941		NCR SVR4	Oracle 7
DEC 7000		1079.07		 $5,932		Open VMS	Oracle 7
HP 890			 710.43		 $6,767		HP UX 9.0	Oracle 7
Sequent 750 cluster	1002.37 	 $9,313		Dynix		Oracle 7
Pyramid MIServer	 645.19		$10,765		DC/OSx		Oracle 7
Sequent 750		 618.39		$11,006		Dynix		Oracle 7

These are a mixture of v1.1 and v1.2 results.

So apart from my faux pas with which RDBMS vendor we used for which results, I think I am still correct in saying that, from the stand point of these results, Sun is definitely up with pack (if not leading in some cases) in the field of RDBMS performance.

Regards,

Tim
---
Received on Mon Mar 14 1994 - 11:06:32 CET