Is the decision already made or is there still room for discussion, analysis and possibly better options?
RF
Robert G. Freeman
Deliverer of Data
Businessolver
Cell: 801-703-3405
Anon: Science. If you don’t make mistakes, you’re doing it wrong. If you don’t correct those mistakes, you’re doing it really wrong. If can’t accept that you’re mistaken, you’re not doing it at all.
From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org [mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org] On Behalf Of Ravi Teja Bellamkonda
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2018 8:45 PM
To: Mladen Gogala <gogala.mladen_at_gmail.com>
Cc: oracle-l <oracle-l_at_freelists.org>
Subject: Re: Performance comparison of Oracle Vs Aurora MySQL
This is a pure OLTP Database. The decision makers are under the impression that having multiple read replicas and spreading the load would solve the problems they are facing ( Can you please comment on this).
They are considering that AWS provided tools would make the migration hassle free.
They got a Camaro with a slow driver and thinking that switching cars would make them go faster.
On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 5:55 PM, Mladen Gogala <gogala.mladen_at_gmail.com<mailto:gogala.mladen_at_gmail.com>> wrote:
Comments in-line
On 04/05/2018 08:11 PM, Ravi Teja Bellamkonda wrote:
Hi Mladen,
First of all thanks for the response.
The primary reason they are considering this migration is to attain a better performing database considering the scaling capabilities of Aurora would solve all the issues which makes a technological decision not a business decision.
Better performing doing what? OLTP? Reporting? Data Warehouse? Data Mart? Oracle, as opposed to various MySQL variants, is completely instrumented with a very rich set of tools to help you diagnose the performance problems. So, where is the problem with Oracle? The answer to that question is crucial for answering your question. What kind of workload is bringing the Oracle RDBMS with 40 processors and 160 GB RAM to its knees? And going from Oracle to something else is ALWAYS a business decision, not a technology decision. If the performance was a problem, a good consultant could probably solve it for a small fraction of the migration cost. You will have a very demanding migration project on your hands that is likely to cost some serious money. Just to copy all the data from Oracle RDBMS --> Aurora will take some hard manual labour and scripting. Remember, you need to replicate the table structure, along with all foreign keys, study all the triggers and see how to replace them and copy all the data in a consistent manner, all while keeping the original database running. You are very unlikely to just disconnect the original DB and plough on with Aurora until the development is done. You are also very likely to need a heterogeneous replication software, like Golden Gate. We are talking about a major project and shelling out some real money, before you can even think of switching to Aurora.
I have done a migration project of migrating Oracle 11.2 --> DB2 9.7 and it was hard, despite the fact that DB2 is much more feature rich than any variant of MySQL. It is easier now with DB2 10 and 11 because those versions can execute PL/SQL natively, but it would still be a major undertaking. Aurora is an order of magnitude more complex.
My disagreement is about the idea of scaling big would fix all the problems.
This is what I think about our scenario:
"If Camaro is not fast enough for you, definitely moving to a 18 Wheeler will not help". I might be completely wrong here.
