Re: ** FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - RECORD-BREAKING TPC-C RECORD!! **

In article <47d1fv$gkg@a3bsrv.nai.net>, psklenar@nai.net (Patrick R. Sklenar) writes: > Howard Perry <dechp@hk.mobitel.telia.se writes: > > > > >It just goes to show that benchmarks cannot be relied upon to compare > >performance of 2 products unless the comparison is made in the same > >circumstances. > If you want to see something a little closer to reality: 1) take the huge TPC-C numbers being thrown around by everyone, (results are available at http://www.tpc.org). 2) look at the number of users they are using to get these kind of numbers. 3) wait 'til the laughter dies down. C'mon folks, 8000 simultaneous users? 4) divide the TPC-C number from step 1 by the number of users in step 2 to get the average TPC-C/user. The three platforms we looked at running Oracle7 were: HP 9000 K410 @ > 3000 tpmC with 3300 users HP 9000 T500 @ > 5500 tpmC with 6600 users Dec Alpha xxxx @ 9000 tpmC with 8000 users When you do the division you get 1.12, 1.15, and 1.17 TPC-C/user. Not much of a difference, really, except the price. For a true comparison, why not try benchmarking with the same number (how about 100) of simultaneous users connected directly over FDDI instead of through 16 front-end user servers, terminal concentrators, and whatever other kind of smoke and mirror tricks you've been doing ? Until TPC enforces the benchmark more rigidly, it's pointless to try and compare. P.S. For additional verbage for these performance comparisons, look at http://www.encompass.is.net/moron.html for buzzword-o-rama Terry Greenlaw (on-site @ Lockheed Martin) Encompass Technologies z50816@mip.lasc.lockheed.com terry@encompass.is.net