Re: Windows vs Linux Performance

From: DA Morgan <damorgan_at_psoug.org>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 15:21:52 -0800
Message-ID: <1169508107.661424@bubbleator.drizzle.com>

mccmx_at_hotmail.com wrote:

>> The biggest issue I have seen with RAC on Windows they didn't even test.
>> The point of RAC is not how much water can I push through the pipe. The
>> point of RAC is FAILOVER.
>>
>> My experience with Windows and failover is that what happens with Linux,
>> subsecond, can take up to 25 seconds with Windows which is not acceptable.

>
> Fair point but the whole point of the document was to compare
> performance of Windows vs Linux, not failover.

But that's not RAC and thus it is meaningless.

> I would lke to have seen the comparison done without the added
> complexity of RAC involved.
>
> Matt

I would too. But again the test is meaningless except as marketing fodder for Microsoft. Which Linux packages were installed? I don't know. Which kernel parameters were set? I don't know. What were the Oracle initialization parameters? I don't know. Integers are not data.

-- 
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace x with u to respond)
Puget Sound Oracle Users Group
www.psoug.org

Received on Mon Jan 22 2007 - 17:21:52 CST