And yet another TPC-C benchmark released by IBM...
Ian Michael Gumby complained that IBM released another TPC-C benchmark, this time on SQL Server, while publishing no IDS benchmark in a year despite promises of a TPC-E result. He asked why IBM could not find a hardware partner as MySQL did with KickFire. InDeep agreed, and Mark Townsend made a joking reply about Sun and Oracle. Discussion only, no answer.
Auto-generated by Claude from the posts below — may be imperfect; read the full thread.
Hey! Rodney Dangerfield must be rolling over in his grave! To add more insult to injury IBM has released yet another TPC-C benchmark today 9/15/08! Only its on Microsoft's SQL Server. So lets see. IBM IM tells the IDS faithful that they're working on a TPC-E benchmark and that IDS is the "go to " platform for OLTP. In the last year, IBM has released no IDS benchmark, and DB2, Sybase, and SQL Server TPC-C benchmarks. Now call me foolish, but doesn't seem that IBM is paying lip service to the IDS community? I mean can you trust what IBM IM says? You want to see something interesting... check out the TPC-H benchmarks. For those that are too lazy here's the link: http://www.tpc.org/tpch/results/tpch_last_ten_results.asp Yeah there's a MySQL benchmark (2 of them actually) on a hardware platform I had never heard of ...KickFire. Now if MySQL can find a hardware platform (even though they are now owned by Sun Microsystems), why can't IBM's IM find a hardware partner for IDS?
Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > Yeah there's a MySQL benchmark (2 of them actually) > on a hardware platform I had never heard of ...KickFire. > // // http://www.kickfire.com/ <== watch the demo // I just love great marketing. Too bad IBM can't touch this. *<8o) > Now if MySQL can find a hardware platform (even though they are now > owned by Sun Microsystems), why can't IBM's IM find a hardware partner > for IDS? > They already _have_ <ahem> hardware... maybe they're too afraid to bench mark it on some of their own equipment.
On Sep 15, 11:50 pm, InDeep <ind...@indeep.com> wrote: > Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > > Yeah there's a MySQL benchmark (2 of them actually) > > on a hardware platform I had never heard of ...KickFire. > > // > //http://www.kickfire.com/ <== watch the demo > // > > I just love great marketing. Too bad IBM can't touch this. > > *<8o) > > > Now if MySQL can find a hardware platform (even though they are now > > owned by Sun Microsystems), why can't IBM's IM find a hardware partner > > for IDS? > > They already _have_ <ahem> hardware... maybe they're too afraid to bench > mark it on some of their own equipment. Well Sun is a hardware shop and the other products exist to help sell more kit. Sun also has been in bed with Oracle for a long long time and I'm sure that Oracle wouldn't be happy to see a MySQL benchmark on a sun box. Albeit, the sizing of the box would be different. One thing that we haven't seen is a combination of components. Meaning using the "new" in memory database and IDS to slam home a higher TPC-C number. Not sure if that would violate the TPC-C benchmarking rules or not, but it would give you an interesting number. In addition. IBM makes cell based blades. IDS is already ported to the cell. Why not a high end benchmark of IDS on a Cell architecture? Or would that perhaps show how weak and useless DB2 is? (Yes I dare to mock DB2 ;-) Actually with the DRDA gateway in to either database, it doesn't really matter from the front side. Just the dba jockey types have to deal with it.
> Sun also has been in bed with Oracle for a long long time and I'm sure > that Oracle wouldn't be happy to see a MySQL benchmark on a sun box. Au contraire. It would make us laugh