imho: Ten to twenty times the power. Only about four times the disc space
needed though...
You can probably tell I am not the greatest Oracle fan. Perhaps the second
most inefficient database ever written. (I would place MS Access at the top
of the list. But then no one would ever think of developing a major
application in Access would they?)
-----Original Message-----
From: Eben Yong [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2003 2:51 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: comparing HP3000 & HP9000
Hi Folks,
Preface: I'm just curious about this. So please, no sales calls!
We have a 997/600 with 16 GB of RAM running the AMSYS application. Our
largest IMAGE database is taking up 33GB of disc. The largest dataset
is 508 bytes long and contains 6.8 million records.
On moving to HP/UX, running ORACLE. What kind of HP9000 system specs
should I entertain?
Any takers? Thanks!
-------------------------------------
Eben Yong
MIS Manager
Health Plan of San Mateo
701 Gateway Blvd
South San Francisco, CA 94080
TEL:650-616-2010
FAX:707-281-2691
www.hpsm.org
[log in to unmask]
-------------------------------------
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail, including attachments, is for the
sole use of the individual(s) to whom it is addressed, and may contain
confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use,
disclosure, distribution, or reproduction is prohibited. If you have
received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail
and destroy this message and its attachments. Thank you for your
cooperation.
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
|
