OT -- TCP/IP (was RE: Performance: NT vs. UNIX)

From: Boivin, Patrice J <BoivinP_at_mar.dfo-mpo.gc.ca>
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 13:58:56 -0400
Message-Id: <10735.126011@fatcity.com>

Don't you just love TCP/IP - I got this half an hour after I received = the
response.

: )

Patrice Boivin
Systems Analyst (Oracle Certified DBA)

Systems Admin & Operations | Admin. et Exploit. des syst=E8mes
Technology Services        | Services technologiques
Informatics Branch         | Direction de l'informatique=20
Maritimes Region, DFO      | R=E9gion des Maritimes, MPO

E-Mail: boivinp_at_mar.dfo-mpo.gc.ca <mailto:boivinp_at_mar.dfo-mpo.gc.ca>=20

	-----Original Message-----
	From:	dgoulet_at_vicr.com [SMTP:dgoulet_at_vicr.com]
	Sent:	Monday, January 08, 2001 12:31 PM
	To:	Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
	Subject:	Re:Performance: NT vs. UNIX

	Dan,

	    OHHHHH I'm probably going to hate myself, but here goes.

	    From a performance point of view, and assuming that you can fit
all or most
	of the data into the SGA so as to minimize IO traffic, I've found
that NT on a
	current class server performs as well as an HP-UX single processor
machine.=20
	Where I've seen real performance improvement is in HP's capability
to address
	more memory than NT and in our having a faster disk array on the
HP's (EMC
	storage) vs. the NT servers which use Clarion arrays.  This gets
into some real
	numbers when your doing large sorts since on HP they end up being
done in memory
	whereas NT uses disk & raid being slower than mirrors, well you get

the drift.

        Where I really prefer HP-UX vs. NT is in stability. Our HP boxes still run for

        months without a reboot or other undesirable condition. But the NT servers

        still require occasional reboots, have occurances of GPF's, and the "blue screen

        of death". Also, NT still ships with that idiot DR.Watson.

        Dick Goulet

	____________________Reply Separator____________________
	Author: Dan.Hubler_at_Metavante.com
	Date:       1/8/2001 7:00 AM


	Used to have just a philosophical debate.
	Now we are getting into a debate about performance involving the NT
bigots
	and the UNIX bigots.

	The latest TPC benchmarks put out by Microsoft appear to have put
alot of
	people in a tizzy about performance.

	So............................
	Anybody out there have any comparisons of performance of NT  vs.
UNIX  in
	a single machine environment?
	Or even observations/opinions on what "size"  NT machine equals the
	performance of what "size"  UNIX machine?

	Please withhold the comments on ease of support, cost, etc.
	Just looking for performance comments.

	Thanks.




	--=20

	Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com


	--=20

	Author:=20
	  INET: Dan.Hubler_at_Metavante.com

	Fat City Network Services    -- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
	San Diego, California        -- Public Internet access / Mailing
Lists
	--------------------------------------------------------------------
	To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
	to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
	the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
	(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
	also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).


	--=20

	Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com


	--=20

	Author:=20
	  INET: dgoulet_at_vicr.com

	Fat City Network Services    -- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
	San Diego, California        -- Public Internet access / Mailing
Lists
	--------------------------------------------------------------------
	To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
	to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
	the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
	(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may

Received on Mon Jan 08 2001 - 11:58:56 CST