RE: Experience with IDS 7.3/WinNT4/4CPU Compaq
Sorry but you are going to get one of my stock replies - if it is critical to the business you don't use NT. IDS on multi-processor Suns is excellent, the later Suns can have 64GB memory, much more than Informix can handle on a per instance basis. WRT to processors you were limited to 64 per machine, but I haven't checked recently Paul Watson # WF Software Ltd # If it ain't broke Tel: +44 1463 674729 # Fix it until it is Fax: +44 1463 678729 # www.wfsoftware.com # -----Original Message----- From: Jay Walters [mailto:jwalters@computer.org] Sent: 12 March 1999 02:28 To: informix-list@iiug.org Subject: Experience with IDS 7.3/WinNT4/4CPU Compaq I am looking for feedback people might have on running a big NT box with IDS vs moving up to a Sun box running Solaris. How solid is IDS 7.3 on a multi-CPU box vs on a Sun box? I need to have a very large (at least for NT) buffer cache as I need to pretty much make a 6-700MB table resident in memory. Are there any limits to IDS buffer cache size on NT vs Solaris? How does IDS scale up from 1-4 CPUs on NT vs Solaris? Thanks in advance. Cheers
Watson, Paul (Paul.Watson@bskyb.com) wrote: : Sorry but you are going to get one of my stock replies - if it is critical : to the business you don't use NT. <snip> : -----Original Message----- : From: Jay Walters [mailto:jwalters@computer.org] : Sent: 12 March 1999 02:28 : To: informix-list@iiug.org : Subject: Experience with IDS 7.3/WinNT4/4CPU Compaq : I am looking for feedback people might have on running a big NT box with : IDS vs moving up to a Sun box running Solaris. How solid is IDS 7.3 on : a multi-CPU box vs on a Sun box? I have an application that's been running on IDS-NT, using two 2-processor NT boxes that's run like a freight train for the last year. The same application running on a 4-way 300-MHZ NT box has been very reliable. I'm running 200-500 gigabyte data warehouses on NT boxes with no reliability problems. We typically don't have a lot of users (maybe 5-6), so I can't address multi-user or scaling concerns, but I'm a big fan of the NT port. Joe Lumbley -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Joe Lumbley(jlumbley@netcom.com) author of: "INFORMIX DBA Survival Guide" The DBA Survival Guide, Second Edition will cover NT, 7.X through 7.3, graphical utilities, more survival hints. Publish date: 12/16/98 FINALLY! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
How much memory did you have in those boxes? I don't know the Informix on NT limits, but I'm going to pretty much need a lot to keep my tables in the buffer cache and have enough room for sorting them in memory too. BTW, I like you book... Joe Lumbley wrote: > > Watson, Paul (Paul.Watson@bskyb.com) wrote: > > : Sorry but you are going to get one of my stock replies - if it is critical > : to the business you don't use NT. > > <snip> > : -----Original Message----- > : From: Jay Walters [mailto:jwalters@computer.org] > : Sent: 12 March 1999 02:28 > : To: informix-list@iiug.org > : Subject: Experience with IDS 7.3/WinNT4/4CPU Compaq > > : I am looking for feedback people might have on running a big NT box with > : IDS vs moving up to a Sun box running Solaris. How solid is IDS 7.3 on > : a multi-CPU box vs on a Sun box? > > I have an application that's been running on IDS-NT, using two 2-processor > NT boxes that's run like a freight train for the last year. The same > application running on a 4-way 300-MHZ NT box has been very reliable. I'm > running 200-500 gigabyte data warehouses on NT boxes with no reliability > problems. We typically don't have a lot of users (maybe 5-6), so I can't > address multi-user or scaling concerns, but I'm a big fan of the NT port. > > Joe Lumbley > -- > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Joe Lumbley(jlumbley@netcom.com) author of: "INFORMIX DBA Survival Guide" > > The DBA Survival Guide, Second Edition will cover NT, 7.X through 7.3, > graphical utilities, more survival hints. Publish date: 12/16/98 FINALLY! > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------