Hello Friends:
 
"F. Alfredo Rego" <[log in to unmask]> wrote about Evan's database
application experiments:
 
>>We recently started working on a new application here; it will have
>>approximately 50 concurrent users.
>
>You are half-way there, Evan, with your 50 users :-)
>
>        The challenge to Oracle still remains:  100 users.
 
And then someone comments:
 
"Another customer who implemented a
>>50 concurrent user oracle application... had started with a
>>large HP9000 G series, but because of Oracle's performance characteristics
>>had been forced to upgrade to a 2-way K420 with gobs of memory and 22 GB of
>>disc on 11 spindles
 
Let me understand this: Oracle, trying to deliver half of the stated
100-user goal, needs two processors and gobs of memory?
 
It's a real testament to marketing. What else could be selling such a
substandard solution?
 
I suppose those PA-8000 HP-UX systems will be arriving on the market just
in time. Sounds like their extra horsepower will be needed if you want to
get your user count into three digits using Oracle.
 
Meanwhile IMAGE just chugs along, supporting several hundred users on
single-processor HP 3000 systems built years ago. That's what I call
kicking productivity butt.
 
Ron Seybold, Editor In Chief
The 3000 NewsWire
Independent Information to Maximize Your HP3000
[log in to unmask]
512-331-0075