470,647 Members | 1,229 Online
Bytes | Developer Community
New Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Post your question to a community of 470,647 developers. It's quick & easy.

DB2 Crushes Oracle RAC on TPC-C benchmark

DB2 UDB V8.2, eServer p595, and TotalStorage FASt900 published an amazing
TPC-C result of 3,210,540 tpmC at a price/performance of $5.19/tpmC,
demonstrating 2.7x better performance than Oracle RAC. Never before has any
database vendor taken such a decisive leadership position in this benchmark.
In fact, this new DB2 result leads the previous record by a margin wider
than the top results of Oracle and Microsoft combined!

http://www-306.ibm.com/software/data...ks/111704.html
Jul 19 '05 #1
5 5387
Mark A wrote:
DB2 UDB V8.2, eServer p595, and TotalStorage FASt900 published an amazing
TPC-C result of 3,210,540 tpmC at a price/performance of $5.19/tpmC,
demonstrating 2.7x better performance than Oracle RAC. Never before has any
database vendor taken such a decisive leadership position in this benchmark.
In fact, this new DB2 result leads the previous record by a margin wider
than the top results of Oracle and Microsoft combined!

http://www-306.ibm.com/software/data...ks/111704.html


What a laugh. Look at the small print at the bottom of the page:

DB2 UDB on IBM eServer p595 (64-way Power5 1.9GHz)

Oracle RAC 10g on HP Integrity rx5670 Cluster 64P (16 x 4-way Intel
Itanium2 6M 1.5GHz)

Is this a comparison of the database products DB2 UDB against Oracle or
the p595 chips at 1.9GHz against the inferior Itanium2 1.5GHz chips.

If IBM has to bend over this far to be faster it deserves to be kicked
in the posterior with a boot.

Shame on IBM for such pathetic nonsense. Shame on you for posting it.
--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
da******@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
Jul 19 '05 #2
"DA Morgan" <da******@x.washington.edu> wrote in message
news:41**********@127.0.0.1...

What a laugh. Look at the small print at the bottom of the page:

DB2 UDB on IBM eServer p595 (64-way Power5 1.9GHz)

Oracle RAC 10g on HP Integrity rx5670 Cluster 64P (16 x 4-way Intel
Itanium2 6M 1.5GHz)

Is this a comparison of the database products DB2 UDB against Oracle or
the p595 chips at 1.9GHz against the inferior Itanium2 1.5GHz chips.

If IBM has to bend over this far to be faster it deserves to be kicked
in the posterior with a boot.

Shame on IBM for such pathetic nonsense. Shame on you for posting it.
--
Daniel A. Morgan


If TPC benchmarks are pathetic nonsense, you will have to explain why Oracle
is so heavily involved with the TPC organization. Many Oracle employees are
on TPC committees, and some are in charge of those committees.

www.tpc.org
http://www.tpc.org/tpcc/results/tpcc_perf_results.asp

http://www-306.ibm.com/software/data...ks/111704.html

Shame on you for being in denial of an independent benchmark organization
that is strongly supported by Oracle Corporation.
Jul 19 '05 #3
Mark A wrote:
"DA Morgan" <da******@x.washington.edu> wrote in message
news:41**********@127.0.0.1...
What a laugh. Look at the small print at the bottom of the page:

DB2 UDB on IBM eServer p595 (64-way Power5 1.9GHz)

Oracle RAC 10g on HP Integrity rx5670 Cluster 64P (16 x 4-way Intel
Itanium2 6M 1.5GHz)

Is this a comparison of the database products DB2 UDB against Oracle or
the p595 chips at 1.9GHz against the inferior Itanium2 1.5GHz chips.

If IBM has to bend over this far to be faster it deserves to be kicked
in the posterior with a boot.

Shame on IBM for such pathetic nonsense. Shame on you for posting it.
--
Daniel A. Morgan

If TPC benchmarks are pathetic nonsense, you will have to explain why Oracle
is so heavily involved with the TPC organization. Many Oracle employees are
on TPC committees, and some are in charge of those committees.

www.tpc.org
http://www.tpc.org/tpcc/results/tpcc_perf_results.asp

http://www-306.ibm.com/software/data...ks/111704.html

Shame on you for being in denial of an independent benchmark organization
that is strongly supported by Oracle Corporation.


Benchmarks are benchmarks. TPC didn't choose the ones to compare: IBM did.

Do you really think a Power5 chip is equivalent to a slower Itanium2?
Answering "yes" might help DB2 but I'll put money on the fact that those
nice hardware people would scream things at you not generally said in
polite company if you are claiming that is IBM's official position about
one of its best chipset.
--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
da******@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
Jul 19 '05 #4
"DA Morgan" <da******@x.washington.edu> wrote in message
news:41**********@127.0.0.1...
Do you really think a Power5 chip is equivalent to a slower Itanium2?
Answering "yes" might help DB2 but I'll put money on the fact that those
nice hardware people would scream things at you not generally said in
polite company if you are claiming that is IBM's official position about
one of its best chipset.
--
Daniel A. Morgan


If TPC benchmarks are pathetic nonsense, you will have to explain why Oracle
is so heavily involved with the TPC organization. Many Oracle employees are
on TPC committees, and some are in charge of those committees.
Jul 19 '05 #5
Mark A wrote:
"DA Morgan" <da******@x.washington.edu> wrote in message
news:41**********@127.0.0.1...
Do you really think a Power5 chip is equivalent to a slower Itanium2?
Answering "yes" might help DB2 but I'll put money on the fact that those
nice hardware people would scream things at you not generally said in
polite company if you are claiming that is IBM's official position about
one of its best chipset.
--
Daniel A. Morgan

If TPC benchmarks are pathetic nonsense, you will have to explain why Oracle
is so heavily involved with the TPC organization. Many Oracle employees are
on TPC committees, and some are in charge of those committees.


Lets try this again and I will use very small words.

This isn't about TPC.
This isn't about the products
It is about Power5 <> Itanium2
It is about AIX <> Unknown

Try addressing the issue I have repeatedly raised rather than posturing
on the value or lack thereof of TPC.
--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
da******@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
Jul 19 '05 #6

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.

Similar topics

125 posts views Thread by Rhino | last post: by
133 posts views Thread by jonathan | last post: by
3 posts views Thread by Gaetano Mendola | last post: by
63 posts views Thread by Nick Palmer | last post: by
3 posts views Thread by UnixSlaxer | last post: by
13 posts views Thread by BigDaDDY | last post: by
6 posts views Thread by Shalu Gupta | last post: by
By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.