Re: Oracle and many users

In article <3adg18$1e9_at_uuneo.neosoft.com>, swhatle_at_starbase.neosoft.com (Steven Whatley) writes:
|>Brian Reed (reed_at_cbict3.att.com) wrote:
|>
|>
|>: I have a friend who is looking into getting a new system, which will
|>: run about 80 simultaneous Oracle users. He found someone with a
|>: 7410, 340Mb RAM, and about 55 simultaneous Oracle users. He said that
|>: as far as he can tell, this system is memory I/O bound, not CPU or
|>: disk bound. From what I've heard about Oracle, it is a memory hog,
|>: so that makes sense.
 

|>: My friend is considering getting an Alpha platform, but has concerns
|>: about it, since he has heard the images are twice as big, and thus feels
|>: the memory usage may be twice as much. He mentioned 1Gb of RAM, which
|>: at first sounded like a lot, but may turn out to be not enough.
 

|>: So, if anyone has any experience with Oracle, or just having many
|>: constantly computing processes at the same time, we'd appreciate
|>: any info you could give us into the sort of system to look at getting.
|>: The questions we thought were significant were the amount of memory,
|>: the type of disk interface to use, and maybe even that the way it is
|>: tuned would have a big impact.
 

|>: Thanks,
 

|>: --
 

|>: Brian D. Reed Brian.D.Reed_at_att.com
|>

We have a 10G database on a 7640 w/512M of RAM and 125 concurrent users. We are frequently CPU-bound and don't have much memory to spare. We are looking forward to upgrading to a 7740 w/1G of RAM soon. I think you will find that requirements vary greatly based on application design, so I'd be careful how much stock you put in other people's experiences.

-- 
Jennifer Corliss is on an InterGalactic cruise...       |The opinions expressed 
                                                        |above may not be those
   ...in her office                                     |of my employer.