Re: Sun Ultra vs. NT Server

netac wrote:
>
> Arend van der Veen wrote:
> >
> > Someone is trying to convince me that I can support and query an oracle
> > database that is 100MB+ on a NT Server. I think they are nuts. They
> > are also trying to convince me that I can store upto about a terabyte on
> > a NT server before I really need to upgrade to a work station (like a
> > Sun Ultra). I think they are reading to much MS propaganda.
> >
> > So the questions are what should the breaking point be when scaling up
> > from an NT server to something more powerful like a Sun Ultra and what
> > is the practical file size limit for NT.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Arend van der Veen
> > UTRS
>
> Well, I hate NT. But a 100+ MB database is tiny, very tiny in fact by
> Oracle standards. So I would say yes, and NT 4 Pentium machine could
> handle this and deliver reasonable performance, depending on your disk
> drive subsystem configuration (what I mean to say is that like with all
> Oracle database, get a few disk drives for that NT box). When should
> you consider a larger machine? It hard to give a direct answer to that
> question, all I will say is you will know when your NT box is out of gas
> by the way it preforms (again, assuming you don't plan on running Oracle
> on it with only two disk drives).
I have run Oracle on an NT box with 4 P-Pros on it. I have 4 instances of 4.5 gig, 2 gig, 2 gig and 1 gig and 50 concurrent users and the system ran fine. In fact when I switched it to the UNIX box, I could not tell a difference. However, I knew that I was getting close to the upper limit of NT.

Thanks
Bryan Received on Sat Feb 22 1997 - 00:00:00 CET