On Fri, Feb 18, 2000 at 06:14:51AM -0800, Rodney Mishima wrote:
>
> But seriously, from presentations I saw; it looks like COM+ is
> well-designed, well-thought out.
But what else would they say at a demo about COM+? That it's a bandaid
on top of a kludge on top of a broken API (which is what it really is.)
>
> On the Windows side, I'll first install Win 2000 professional, then
> upgrade to Win 2000 Server, and finally Win 2000 Advanced Server.
Be VERY mindful of the system requirements of these OS's. If you don't
have a multiprocessing machine, you can't run Advanced Server.
>
> I am wondering. If it is true that Win 2000 Advanced Server leaps ahead
> of Unix/Oracle; why can't Linux(possibly TurboCluster) running on the
> same hardware leap ahead of Win 2000?
It probably can, but since it's illegal to publish benchmarks about
Oracle (without Oracle's permission) you will never see that fact in
print. I have friends who have run benchmarks on identical machines
running Oracle on NT, SCO, and Linux and have now switched to using
Linux on their servers if that's any indication :)
Have fun going through the endless install cycles.
greg k-h
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
