Article: HP Wins Oracle Lawsuit
By: Michael S (already5chosen.delete@this.yahoo.com), August 5, 2012 1:55 pm
Room: Moderated Discussions
Kira (kirsc.delete@this.aeterna.ru) on August 5, 2012 2:26 pm wrote:
> mpx (mpx.delete@this.nomail.pl) on August 1, 2012 11:19 pm wrote:
> >
> defderdar (derderdar.delete@this.mailinator.com) on August 1, 2012 2:52 pm
>
> > wrote:
> > > won't Oracle try to cripple some performance on some
> level
> >
> >
> > Itanium does it by itself, there's no need for
> external intervention.
> >
> >
> >
>
> So if Itanium support should be
> killed because of its supposedly "crippling" performance, why on earth should
> Oracle keep supporting the (far slower) M-series SPARC?
I'd expect fully loaded M9000 (64-socket SPARC64 VII+) to be approximately twice faster than fully loaded Superdome2 (32-socket Tukwila) in majority of commercial applications.
Do you have a hard data that could contradict my expectations?
> mpx (mpx.delete@this.nomail.pl) on August 1, 2012 11:19 pm wrote:
> >
> defderdar (derderdar.delete@this.mailinator.com) on August 1, 2012 2:52 pm
>
> > wrote:
> > > won't Oracle try to cripple some performance on some
> level
> >
> >
> > Itanium does it by itself, there's no need for
> external intervention.
> >
> >
> >
>
> So if Itanium support should be
> killed because of its supposedly "crippling" performance, why on earth should
> Oracle keep supporting the (far slower) M-series SPARC?
I'd expect fully loaded M9000 (64-socket SPARC64 VII+) to be approximately twice faster than fully loaded Superdome2 (32-socket Tukwila) in majority of commercial applications.
Do you have a hard data that could contradict my expectations?