Re: What is Oracle10G?

"Noons" <wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au.nospam> wrote in message news:<3f1d1799$2$31924$afc38c87_at_news.optusnet.com.au>...
> "JEDIDIAH" <jedithezealot_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:5121813f.0307212050.cfb4c_at_posting.google.com...
>
> > >
> > > Hmmmm, I'll need to digest this one. You implying that we're
> > > going the way of the "super-mainframe" made of lots of little
> > > processing nodes? The Sun mantra: the network is the computer?
> > > Are we there yet? I don't think so: RAC is not the solution
> > > and blades technology is nowhere near that.
> >
> > Actually, RAC seems to be coming along rather nicely. It seems
> > like the claims about transparent allocation and de-allocation of
> > nodes and storage are total propaganda. However, Oracle seems to
> > scale better across multiple machines with lesser CPU's and SGA's
> > rather than one big mainframe style monster.
>
> Sorry, let me clarify something here: I don't doubt for a second
> RAC is coming along quite nicely. What I said is that it is
> not the appropriate solution for the Sun "network is the computer"

    Sure it is. RAC is a networked collection of smaller machines that together can equal or surpass a larger machine equipped with the same number of CPUs and RAM.

    A RAC cluster certainly fits this description much better than any mainframe wannabe Sun NUMA machine.

> paradigm/metaphore/insert-whatever-the-flavour-is-now.
> Not saying that it doesn't work.
>
> >
> > In this respect, 10G is actually the polar opposite of mainframes.
> >
>
> I thought so.
Received on Tue Jul 22 2003 - 20:42:07 CDT