Slashdot Mirror
New Linux TPC-H Record Set
prostoalex writes: "New TPC-H world record for performance and scalability of database software on Linux platform has been set. The winner - Oracle 10g running on a four-node Lenovo Cluster Server DeepComp 6800, each with four Intel Itanium 2 1.3 GHz processors. Oracle also emphasizes that it's 3.5 times more performance than similar IBM DB2 benchmark. TPC-H benchmarks are available at TPC Web site."
Sun is behind windows by such a huge margin? I thought solaris sets standards for stability.
New year Resolution: Don't change sig this year
Linux is clearly being taken seriously. It's pounding the competition in the server space, and it's beginning to make serious inroads to the desktop.
Desktop Linux stories carry some interest to me, but on a server? That's old hat, old news, and very much humdrum.
This article really should be more about the cluster of Itanium chips, which actually determine the speed of the system, rather than "it runs Linux!" which in this case is largely irrelevant.
Linux is as responsible for the success of this as a dog is responsible for the bus that hit it. Similar results could easily be obtained, I'm sure, with any number of BSD variants, or other *nixes compiled to run on Itanium.
This would have been news 3 years ago, but today? Bah!
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
Shouldn't that read "New TPC-H Record Set Using Oracle?"
The article didn't give much details, but how much of this performance is directly attributable to Linux (specifically Red Hat AS3)? What was the OS of the system it beat? Could that also have been Linux? How much of the performance can be attributed to the (suspiciously un-Beowulf) Lenovo cluster?
From what I know of benchmarks, the numbers given reflect real-world preformance, to within one order of magnitude.
At first, I thought, It's just a press release, big deal... But wait, they used Linux, so it must be another straw on the back of the camel knows as the Closed Source Business Model. But wait, it's running Oracle, so it must therefore be evil. Aieeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!
SGI have built the largest Linux machine (512 processor machine at NASA) and managed to destroy the previous memory bandwidth record held by NEC, by achieving 1 terabyte/s.
have to point out the Xeon processors have 2Mb L2 cache, where as the the Itanium2 have 512kb. That makes a huge difference for TPC-H queries. Plus, don't believe Intel's hype about Itanium. Xeon is still a kick ass CPU.
and bitch about how the MS solution is better, here is a little secret. If you look at the current #3 from HP http://www.tpc.org/tpcc/results/tpcc_result_detail .asp?id=103082701,
you see it says COM+. Well that's not the whole truth. If you look at the actual source code, you will see references to tuxedo. It's a C++ port of tuxedo. the original TUX/TUXEDO was created by AT&T http://www.middleware.net/tuxedo/articles/tuxedo_h istory.html. Microsoft isn't stupid, but it's hardly surprising. It doesn't make any sense for anyone to re-invet transaction management, but it is lame that Microsft tries to pass it off as their innovative technology. I don't know if MS is the one who wrote the COM+ scheduler for the clients, but that is reason for the good results the last few years. I'm guessing HP is the one who wrote the COM+ port of tuxedo, since they have lots of experience with unix and MS doesn't. don't take my word, read the full disclosure yourself.
Well not me - Oracle shafted me when Oracle for DOS was discontinued and my enterprise's direct mailing system was based on it. I was shafted by Oracle for OS/2 being discontinued when the inventry management system used in my enterprise was based on it, and shafted when Oracle Power Objects used for my factory management system died from Y2K problems.
I chose PostgreSQL over Oracle for my enterprise - Open source cannot die on you, be withdrawn, or have support withdrawn.
I would have chosen DB2, but it has no native FreeBSD support, and I have no access to AS400s in my present employment.
Why is there no benchmark for the number of clients shafted by withdrawl of product? Oracle would win that one outright!
If you want to be sure your product is a secure base for an enterprise Open Source is the only choice
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII