Jonathan Lewis wrote:
> I think it would be very interesting, and highly
> educational, if the IBM team dissected the
> Oracle implementation of TPCC to explain
> how Oracle had passed the test without producing
> a system that would really function for more than
> the required 8 hours in the real world ... and
> Oracle did exactly the same for the DB2 test.
>
> It would teach people an awful lot about
> which features of the two engines were
> beneficial in what scenarios, and the
> penalties you had to pay to use them.
>
>
> Regards
>
> Jonathan Lewis
>
> http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/faq/ind_faq.html
> The Co-operative Oracle Users' FAQ
>
> http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/seminar.html
> Public Appearances - schedule updated 21st Jan 2005
>
>
>
> "Serge Rielau" <srielau_at_ca.ibm.com> wrote in message
> news:35g51pF4n60bmU1_at_individual.net...
>
>>PS: Simple scenario equals less than 10 tables.. Imagine there would be a
>>real - real world benchmark ;-)
>>
>>--
>>Serge Rielau
>>DB2 SQL Compiler Development
>>IBM Toronto Lab
>
>
>
*lol* Right you are.
I give Oracle a head start: Don't use DB2's range clustered tables in an
OLTP system (any more than I would use hash clustered tables in Oracle
for the same purpose..)
It is a drag race, that's for use.
To give the benchmark credit though: One can learn a lot from it as long
as one keeps in mind that it's a benchmark.
Cheers
Serge
--
Serge Rielau
DB2 SQL Compiler Development
IBM Toronto Lab
Received on Sun Jan 23 2005 - 08:29:05 CST
