Date: Thu, 13 Mar 1997 20:56:59 +0900 (JST) From: Michael Hancock <michaelh@cet.co.jp> To: Darren Reed <avalon@coombs.anu.edu.au> Cc: ccsanady@nyx.pr.mcs.net, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Solaris TPC-C benchmarks (with Oracle) Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.95.970313202320.28538A-100000@parkplace.cet.co.jp> In-Reply-To: <199703130610.GAA26383@parkplace.cet.co.jp>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 13 Mar 1997, Darren Reed wrote: > Did the run Solaris on the same hardware or different hardware ? Sun TPC-C Report ---------------- http://www.sun.com/smi/Press/sunflash/9703/sunflash.970305.1083.html Solaris (Intel version) IBM 704 PC Server Oracle Universal Server release 7.3.3 Total cost = $88.00/tpmC * 6679.50tpmC = $587,796 Compaq TPC-C Report ------------------- http://www.compaq.com/newsroom/pr/pr211196b.html UnixWare 2.1.1 Compaq ProLiant 5000 Sybase 11 Total cost = $95/tpmC * 8311.43tpmC = $792,738 > Having used a Proliant 2500 which has RAID-5 disk, I assume the 5000 does > too.. I'm sure both configs had as many RAID-5 controllers as could fit in the machine and at least 49 2GB disks and lots of RAM. Umm, let's see what www.tpc.org has ... Compaq ProLiant 4500/133 Model2 c/s 3.0 3516.27 $185 $651,647 Oracle7 v.7.3 UnixWare 2.03 Compaq ProLiant 4500/133 Model2 c/s 3.0 3225.50 $206 $665,806 Oracle7 v.7.3 Solaris v.2.5.1 UnixWare has a little better performance in this older benchmark. Regards, Mike Hancock
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.SV4.3.95.970313202320.28538A-100000>