Re: T3 processor/system & Oracle License

Tim writes:

> Why should you expect to be able to do more processing for the same money?

"processing" in that context does not equal database performance.  I'd say
that 95% of the Oracle DBs I've worked with over the past 14 years or so
have been constrained by IO and not the ability to generate that IO (via
CPU).

I don't want more cores for my database server.  But IBM and others are
forcing their customers into that model.  To stay somewhat current with
Oracle in order to just gain bugfixes, one must upgrade.  However, newer
versions of the DB software require newer OS versions.  And in some cases,
newer OS versions require newer hardware.  Or the vendor continually
increases annual maintenance costs on existing hardware in order to "force"
server upgrades, which then reverses the interoperability chain back to the
DB version.

It's like the Onion.com's 5-blade razor story (which is NSFW, BTW).  Forget
the customer -- let's see how many cores we can slap on a chip!

Makes a DBA want to use Postgres.  I'm just sayin'...

Rich

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

Other related posts: