Linked by David Adams on Thu 29th Oct 2009 22:44 UTC
General Unix I had the pleasure earlier this month of attending a demo day at HP's Cupertino campus to commemorate the ten year anniversary of the Superdome server, see what's new in the high-end server market and learn about what's going on with HP-UX.
Thread beginning with comment 391919
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: The IBM option
by dvzt on Fri 30th Oct 2009 08:57 UTC in reply to "The IBM option"
dvzt
Member since:
2008-10-23

POWER7 will be lethal. It will be interesting to see if Oracle/Sun can keep up. Intel seems to not really care about Itanium.


You're kidding, right? Do you realise Sun is now king of TPC-C nenchmark? And also comes better with price/performance ratio.
http://www.tpc.org/tpcc/results/tpcc_perf_results.asp

Also the Exadata V2 database machine is something that will IBM see hard to match.

I don't think people really care about overpriced IBM gear anymore.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[2]: The IBM option
by kaiwai on Fri 30th Oct 2009 09:11 in reply to "RE: The IBM option"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

You're kidding, right? Do you realise Sun is now king of TPC-C nenchmark? And also comes better with price/performance ratio.
http://www.tpc.org/tpcc/results/tpcc_perf_results.asp

Also the Exadata V2 database machine is something that will IBM see hard to match.

I don't think people really care about overpriced IBM gear anymore.


What I find funny is Microsoft isn't to be found on that list - what happened? ;)

The only people who care about IBM are those who purchase Microsoft products and think they perform peachy in the enterprise; you know the sort, when they ring up and want a mail server - they'll ask for an Exchange server - asking for products by brand because that is all they know, the brand.

Oracle has improved though, I remember 3 years ago it was a horrible piece of crap that made any Sun hardware appear like it was a slug; Sybase had no problems pumping out the numbers on Solaris on both SPARC and x86-64 machines.

Edited 2009-10-30 09:13 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: The IBM option
by joshuah on Fri 30th Oct 2009 10:55 in reply to "RE: The IBM option"
joshuah Member since:
2007-06-01

Do you actually know the price of exadata? Do you really know what you are getting, when you buy Exadata? Or are you just trolling?
I know what you get when you buy exadata. You buy a bunch off x86 servers with SATA drives for a LOT of money, and you are stuck with that peace of gear, that can't run anything else then Oracle SW. And trust me Oracle RAC ain't cheap and Oracle RAC ain't what they advertise it to be. And you tell me IBM HW is overpriced?! On which you can get support for Linux/AIX...and you actually have a choice what to use, and no one is forcing you to use AIX?!


EDIT: dvzt, are you a manager or somthing? You sound like one, they love the marketing slides and the fancy charts. And most of the times they don't have a clue on the matter at hand.

Edited 2009-10-30 11:09 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: The IBM option
by tylerdurden on Fri 30th Oct 2009 16:31 in reply to "RE[2]: The IBM option"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

Wait a second, are you saying that a negative point of an application specific machine like exadata is that is not general purpose? Whaaaaaaaa?

You'd be shocked to know that the customers which are buying those machines like hotcakes do so because it runs their tailored oracle apps really, really fast. That is why the purchase them, not because they wanted to run something else. Jeez.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: The IBM option
by dvzt on Fri 30th Oct 2009 17:32 in reply to "RE[2]: The IBM option"
dvzt Member since:
2008-10-23

Do you actually know the price of exadata? Do you really know what you are getting, when you buy Exadata? Or are you just trolling?
I know what you get when you buy exadata. You buy a bunch off x86 servers with SATA drives


...and infiniband HCAs, switches, Oracle RDBMS (== expensive)


for a LOT of money, and you are stuck with that peace of gear, that can't run anything else then Oracle SW.


So what? Any reasonable application can use Oracle as its database backend. You will hardly want to use that hardware for a different purpose.


And trust me Oracle RAC ain't cheap and Oracle RAC ain't what they advertise it to be.


Tell me then, what is it? I must have been fooled. ;)


And you tell me IBM HW is overpriced?! On which you can get support for Linux/AIX...and you actually have a choice what to use, and no one is forcing you to use AIX?!


I would choose AIX instead of Linux any day.

But let's get back to the topic: Exadata V2 was just an example of another "lethal machine". Let's compare oranges to oranges. (and apples to Apples under yet another Psystar article) IBM p595 was recently beaten by a cluster of Sun T5440s, giving better price/tpc-c, smaller latency etc... That's what I was talking about. IBM is known to be overpriced.


EDIT: dvzt, are you a manager or somthing? You sound like one, they love the marketing slides and the fancy charts. And most of the times they don't have a clue on the matter at hand.


Sorry to disappoint you, but no, just a regular sysadmin.
While I always enjoy a good manger/sales people bashing, you should make sure not to act like one, too. And you kind of did that - appliances shouldn't be compared to general purpose servers.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: The IBM option
by NorthWay on Fri 30th Oct 2009 23:19 in reply to "RE: The IBM option"
NorthWay Member since:
2007-02-22

I have seen the new TCP score from Oracle. Congratulations to them for topping the chart.

One funky thing though - that is the only cluster solution you see in the list. You can't even get Oracle people to recommend using RAC over a big multi-CPU machine so long as someone pays for the hw. Administration and support is a day and night difference. No admin wants to run RAC if they can avoid.
And have you looked at the percentage licenses are of the total cost? No wonder they want to sell you that setup.


You might also guess that there might be updates possible to the IBM setup.
Which is all so-so interesting of course.
What IBM _is_ doing is more interesting. Power7 will come some time next year and will probably come in a 256-way p595. You can take a guess at the performance that will have (Cost? Yes. Lots of it I expect.)
They also have their own cluster solution with DB2 PureScale. I expect you can chain p595s into that cluster till the cows come home. There will be very interesting times ahead indeed, and I'm not at all certain Oracle will be able to scale up if they want to stay in the numbers game.

Personal opinion: 7.7m was by far not enough to make an impact. IBM has publicly talked about their Power7 and I think that will have the "PS2 effect" in the market; that it will stop many that might be seriously interest in the Sun RAC setup to wait-and-see (if they have the time) and compare it to a similar Power7 setup.

(For the record: I both use and like AIX.)

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: The IBM option
by Kebabbert on Sun 1st Nov 2009 16:09 in reply to "RE[2]: The IBM option"
Kebabbert Member since:
2007-07-27

Yeah the Power7 will be fast. But Fujitsu is releasing a octocore SPARC 64 next year called Venus. It has the same performance as Power7: 128Gflops.

And also the Sparc Niagara is extremely fast on certain workloads. For instance, Siebel v8 benchmarks, one Sun T5440 with four 1.4GHz Niagara is twice as fast as three IBM Power570 servers with fourteen Power6+ CPUs at 4.7GHz. One T5440 cost 76.000USD which is quite a lot of money. But one P570 server cost 413.000USD which is many times more. You would need six P570 servers to match one T5440. See benchmarks on Oracle site. There are whitepapers from IBM and from SUN. Compare them.

Reply Parent Score: 1