gupta@cullsj.UUCP (Yogesh Gupta) (08/02/88)
Recently (July 18th and 19th) DEC and Oracle have annonced products that aimed at the OLTP market. DEC claims 25 TPS (TP1 benchmark) on an 88xx and Oracle claims a 32.8 TPS (TP1 benchmark) on an 8820. These numbers, even though they are not yet close to what IMS or IDMS can do on an IBM, seem to be quite impressive. DEC also announced new TP monitors etc. So, any ideas as to where the OLTP market is going on the VAXes? Other than being THE buzzword for the industry, what makes or does not make a DBMS an OLTP system? What really are the requirements of the OLTP market? There have been studies that indicate that 95% of the customers need less than 20 TPS, when it comes to speed. Is it realistic to expect to support 500 terminals on a VAX (any VAX) in the near future? Any discussion of the above will be appreciated. -- Yogesh Gupta | If you think my company will let me Cullinet Software, Inc. | speak for them, you must be joking.
john@anasaz.UUCP (John Moore) (08/04/88)
In article <376@cullsj.UUCP% gupta@cullsj.UUCP (Yogesh Gupta) writes:
%than being THE buzzword for the industry, what makes or does not make
%a DBMS an OLTP system? What really are the requirements of the OLTP
%market? There have been studies that indicate that 95% of the customers
%need less than 20 TPS, when it comes to speed. Is it realistic to expect
%to support 500 terminals on a VAX (any VAX) in the near future?
We are working on serious OLTP systems (large scale reservation systems)
using RDBMS technology. What we need is PERFORMANCE (1 res transaction
per second is about 25 TP1's!), AVAILABILITY (when it goes down,
its a real problem), and PREDICTABILITY (no transaction should take
very long because of unexpected behavior in the SQL optimzer).
It appears that PERFORMANCE is on everyone's list (ORACLE, INFORMIX,
INGRESS, UNIFY, SYBASE). AVAILABILITY is NOT! Some RDBMS's require
that the system be shut down to take backups. None that I am aware
of directly provide disk mirroring. PREDICTABILITY has not even
been mentioned in any of the literature I have seen.
--
John Moore (NJ7E) {decvax, ncar, ihnp4}!noao!nud!anasaz!john
(602) 861-7607 (day or eve) {gatech, ames, rutgers}!ncar!...
The opinions expressed here are obviously not mine, so they must be
someone else's.yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) (08/05/88)
In article <1156@anasaz.UUCP> john@anasaz.UUCP (John Moore) writes: >It appears that PERFORMANCE is on everyone's list (ORACLE, INFORMIX, >INGRESS, UNIFY, SYBASE). That's Ingres, one 's', not two. Or are we going to have Oraclee, Informixx, Unifyy and Sybasee? :-) -Peter Yee yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov ames!yee
jbeard@quintus.uucp (Jeff Beard) (08/06/88)
Your criteria is the bread and butter of the Tandem Non-stop system. Suggest you contact a vendor representative for documentation.
bejc@pyrnova (Brian Clark) (08/09/88)
In article <1156@anasaz.UUCP> john@anasaz.UUCP (John Moore) writes: >It appears that PERFORMANCE is on everyone's list (ORACLE, INFORMIX, >INGRESS, UNIFY, SYBASE). AVAILABILITY is NOT! Some RDBMS's require >that the system be shut down to take backups. None that I am aware >of directly provide disk mirroring. PREDICTABILITY has not even I am a little concerned at posting this here for fear of being flamed for making a product announcement, but... I would refer you to the paper Virtual Disks - A New Means of Unix Disk Configuration Tom van Baak & Brian Clark, Pyramid Technology Proceedings of the German Unix User Group conference, September 1987. This describes the implementation of mirrorred disks, and three other disk models within the Unix file system environment. All of the models are pertinent to the database environment, and reflect the way in which systems vendors are reacting to concerns other than PERFORMANCE Virtual disks have been around for about 18 months now, and I'd be happy to tell you all about them by mail. Brian E.J. Clark Pyramid Technology Corp bejc@pyramid