Re: Windows v Unix Performance on Oracle 9i

"Joel Garry" <joel-garry_at_home.com> wrote in message news:91884734.0405051441.6993253_at_posting.google.com...
> subs_at_robtudor.co.uk (Rob) wrote in message
news:<cd6e7d58.0405050615.5947cd17_at_posting.google.com>...
> > Does anyone know if there are any good comparisons between Windows and
> > Unix performance? Or does anyone have examples of Oracle databases
> > running large numbers (200+) of concurrent users. I am trying to
> > investigate what size implementations can be placed onto Windows 2000
> > / Windows 2003 as opposed to UNIX but cannot find much data.
> >
> > Any information would be much appreciated.
> >
> > Cheers.
>
> As a matter of fact, yes:
>
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&th=511ddc260aead7b6&rnum=2
>
> I also would be interested if anyone is running 200+ actual concurrent
> users (not just connections) on Windows. I would find it hard to
> believe.
>
> jg
> --
> _at_home.com is bogus.
> Like using
http://www.autoweek.com/specials/galleries/scaglietti/pages/612_Scaglietti_04.htm
> as a school bus.

I think you are going to get better scalability on Unix over Windows. I did work for a company and we had a very efficient application (bind variables, cursor reuse - parse once execute many) and were able to get many more than 200+ concurrent users. There are a ton of variables.

How efficient is your application? (scalable) Is it more OLTP or OLAP? (ours was OLTP by far) What is the application doing in some sort of work flow for the application? How many disks?
How much RAM?
...
We were able to load test up to about 1,500 concurrent users on Oracle 8.0 with our application on a very beefy Windows NT box. On Unix we were able to get a lot more users; our biggest problem was getting enough client machines so we could test UNIX!
Jim Received on Thu May 06 2004 - 04:29:54 CEST