RE: OT RE: Async I/O on Windows

[Mohan, Ross]

Title: RE: Async I/O on Windows

Well, that was certainly a interestingly-reasoned response. I haven't

seen logic applied like that since...since....since....well, I have never

seen such a display of logic.

 

 

Just to recap, your arguments are:

 

1) "Just because they didn't do a benchmark, doesn't mean they can't"

 

    Actually, Oracle submitted a benchmark. Lot's of them. Right now, they FAIL to

    top the list in ANY category.

 

2) "Benchmarks are expensive, and so Oracle won't repeat them, because Oracle is the best."

 

    I guess, on this basis, we can cancel the Olympics, the Tour de France, etc. The major networks

    could save BOATS of money by letting them in on this stunning insight. Come to think of it,

    this would put Alex Trebek, (the host of Jeopardy! ) out of a job. Why keep showing that

    silly show?

 

3) They don't factor "scientists" [sic] into Price/Performance benchmarks.

   

    Well....not explicitly, no. Just by WINNING them!  Ha! Or did I misunderstand, and your

    real complaint was that Microsoft has scientists, and Oracle doesn't?

 

4)  "Can you do a benchmark?"

 

    No; properly done and referred, they cost about six figures. I have found it far more cost-effective

    to read the results. Of course, having an entirely uninformed opinion is highly cost effective, too.

 

 

 

 

 -----Original Message-----
From: Richard Ji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 2:30 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Subject: RE: OT RE: Async I/O on Windows

Just because Oracle hasn't done a benchmark doesn't mean Oracle can't out perform SQL-Server or DB2.  Benchmark is very expensive to do, Oracle doesn't need to prove to the world every year that it is the best.  Oracle has the reputation that MS and IBM don't have.  That's why MS and IBM needs to do it.  And do you know how many scientists MS had to do that benchmark?  I wonder if they factor that into the Price/Performance.  Can you (do you) have the same resources in the real world to achive that result?  Needless to say performance is not the only thing you measure a DB.  How good is SQL-Server when the underlying OS crashes so often?

 

Richard Ji

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Mohan, Ross
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 10:56 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Subject: OT RE: Async I/O on Windows

"NT still pants"...LOL!!!

 

It must be panting alot, It has BLOWN THE DOORS OFF of "Oracle on Unix" in running

SQLServer on NT, as has DB2.

 

The general public ( and anyone else ) can wake up and smell the coffee at www.tpc.org. 

Check out the Top Ten TPC-C marks, by pure performance.

 

Not interested in pure peformance?  Check out the Price/Performance leaders. Oracle doesn't

even SHOW UP in the top ten. What a shocker, eh? It's painful to lose our illusions....

 

Oh, what's that? You don't like TPC-C? It's outmoded or somesuch? Fine, check out ANY

of the TPC benchmarks. Oracle is NEVER in the top three. Usually, it doesn't even show

up.

 

I mean, I like Oracle, too, but....by the time you turn on the multimode airconditioner, use

the 12-way adjustable power bucket seats, activate the object-oriented OnStar Satellite

navigational system, power up the heated side view mirrors and all the other tools, trinkets,

and toys that make it my personal favorite database, there *is* the chance that the

twenty year old genius mechanic in the the tricked out Nova next to you at the light is going

to kick your ass when the light turns green.

 

But really, I still love Oracle. Warts and all.

 

Wanna drag?

 

(heh heh heh)

 

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Leith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2001 6:45 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Subject: RE: Async I/O on Windows

I have actually been doing a fair it of reading on this since the topic was brought up, and stand corrected, as earlier mentioned. But I have to say guys that NT is still fairly "pants" when it comes to handling multi threaded processes.. Win2K is a great improvement but M$ still has a lot of work to do on in my view. (only when you compare this against UNIX)

 

Now don't get me wrong, there is enough traffic on this list about this at the moment, so I dont want more bandwith added with this thread if at all possible :)

 

Thanks for the reply anyway Yong, I think I will wait for a "good" book on Win2k to come out (unless you know one?) before I go out and buy one (books come out of my pocket as I am a sales person mostly).. NT as far as I am concerned is now in Win2K's shadow, and I think that is the way of the future for Windowze bound people.

 

For all out there that have used NT and not Win2K - TRY IT.. Services are handled a LOT better, file management and sharing.. All sorts of new fun stuff to sink your teeth in to..

 

As a side note, for the last line of my first paragraph - I also feel that UNIX cannot be compared in anyway to Windows at this time. Windowze O/S's are designed for pointy clicky people that prefer to look at a nice GUI interface, and generally don't have the indepth technical knowledge that a good UNIX sys admin does..

 

(If there any NT admins out there don't flame me, I have to deal with it every day of my life...)

 

Regards

 

Mark

 

The views expressed here are soley those coming out of my coffee deprived hungover mind.. They do not express those of my employers, though I'm sure they agree :^)

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Mohan, Ross
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 07:00
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Subject: RE: Async I/O on Windows

Oracle on NT runs as

ONE PROCESS

with

MULTIPLE THREADS

for performance reasons (no more
need for shared memory....context switches
are a LOT less expensive, etc.)

-----Original Message-----
From: yong huang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 12:51 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Subject: Async I/O on Windows

Hi, Mark,

Async I/O is available on Windows, at least NT. It's not an easy topic. If you
think you already know enough about operating systems in general, I suggest you
read David Solomon's "Inside WindowsNT". For a lab test, launch Performance
Monitor on your NT box and look at the counters for Cache.

I'm not sure by "single thread management" whether you mean NT can't have
multiple processes or Oracle on NT runs as one thread. The former is obviously
wrong. The latter is a design issue inside Oracle Corporation and the question
as to why was asked on this forum before without an answer (without an answer I
can remember, that is).

Yong Huang
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

you wrote:

Asynch I/O on a Windowze box? supresses a snigger...

To the best of my knowledge there are no Windows based system that can take
advantage of this, single thread management can be enough a problem
sometimes..

But, I may be wrong.. List?

__________________________________________________
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year!  http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
--
Author: yong huang
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fat City Network Services    -- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California        -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
--------------------------------------------------------------------
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).