Re: Informix vs. Sybase vs. Oracle vs. (gasp) MS SQL Server

In <5ith88$14g@mew.corp.sgi.com>, Pablo Sanchez wrote: <snip> >Overall: >======== >Due to the limitation of the data cache (max of 1 gig) and the lack >of variable I/O read/writes I'd pick Sybase over Informix as of this >writing (4.14.97). For a heavy DSS application I'd probably pick >Oracle but I don't know enough about Oracle to really say but with a >current max of 128K per I/O.... well... > Hello, Do you go by your own standard of benchmarking or look into sometihing generally approved in the market. If you prefer the latter, insted of adding up the cash sizes and multiplying with disk writes, take a look at the new TCP-D bench mark. HP AND INFORMIX REVOLUTIONIZE DSS PERFORMANCE WITH NUMBERS THAT SHATTER EXISTING TPC-D RESULTS Vendor/System Total Power Throughput Price/Perf CPUs (QppD@300GB) (QthD@300GB) ($/QphD@300GB) HP 9000 EPS22 with Informix XPS 48 3,416.4 1,673 $3,007 NCR 5100M with Teradata 160 1,501.1 1,028.3 9,374 IBM RS/6000 with Oracle OPS 128 1,360.5 916.3 11,969 Sun Ultra Enterprise 10000 with Oracle 64 2,009.5 1,241.9 3,312 Pyramid RM1000 with Oracle OPS 96 1,169.2 749.3 10,225 Note: These results are current as of 4/7/97. If you like to advocate for Sybase or Oracle in this user group, let us have some proof like the above, which may get some more supporters for Sybase. Good Luck Felix K. Mathews