Re: NT server, pro/con

The only thing I've heard bad about NT is the fact that it does hit a roof with large databases and a large number of concurrent users. Also it scales only up to two INTEL CPUs in reality - some guy I worked with had NT 3.5 on a two PENTIUM box and maxed it out, he then ran the same ORacle database on a four Pentium box and it was 10% faster than the 2 Pentium box. They were looking into Solaris and UnixWare last I heard.

But I have seen small workgroups running NT and it is fast . . .

In terms of learning - NT is still confusing for me. Than again, so it UNIX. Whatever you're familiar with I guess.

Stephen H Fick (shf_at_world.std.com) wrote:
: While working on an assignment to choose a database product,
: I've just been asked to look into using an NT server
: rather than a Sun Solaris 2.x server.
 

: I'm interested in hearing people's evaluation of the merits
: and demerits of an NT server in a server/client RDB
: environment. Speed, reliability, security, expandability,
: ease of learning the system administration work, ease of
: performing it--talking here about the NT side of things,
: not the RDB side--are obvious areas of concern. Are there
: others? How does NT stack up, to date?
 

: As you may have deduced, I have plenty of Unix experience,
: none with NT.
 

: Will be glad to post a summary, or to forward to individual
: responders.
 

: Tia,
: Steve

-- 

Tim Wong
roadgoat_at_crl.com
"Sometimes it's only madness that makes us what we are." - Grant Morrison