On 2005-01-23, DA Morgan <damorgan@x.washington.edu> wrote:
> Serge Rielau wrote:
>
>> DA Morgan wrote:
>>
>>> Someone else is going to do it soon or later so I'll beat them to it.
>>>
>>> http://www-306.ibm.com/software/data...ks/111704.html
>>>
>>> And if you believe what you just read ... take a good look at the small
>>> print at the bottom of the page.
>>>
>>> DB2 was run on:
>>> DB2 UDB on IBM eServer p595 (64-way Power5 1.9GHz):
>>> DB2 UDB on IBM eServer p570 16P (16-way Power5 1.9GHz)
>>>
>>> While Oracle was run on:
>>> HP Integrity rx5670 Cluster 64P (16 x 4-way Intel Itanium2 6M 1.5GHz)
>>> Unisys ES7000 Aries 420 Ent. Server (16-way Intel Itanium2 1.5GHz)
>>>
>>> Wow ... I guess IBM is saying a Power5 at 1.9GHz is equivalent to an
>>> Itanium2 at 1.5GHz: I don't think so.
>>>
>>> Only one citation is for identical hardware and there isn't enough
>>> information to make a comparison meaningful. I'm thinking IBM is afraid
>>> of a true head-to-head comparison or they wouldn't have had to stoop so
>>> low.
>>
>> Pre-emptive trolling.. way to go...
>
> Actually no. The very first post was made in comp.databases.oracle by a
> shill for IBM which is where I saw it. If you folks hadn't lobbed the
> first grenade no one would have shot back.

If you stopped pretending you were Ellison for a moment you might
actually see how the propaganda in question might actually be of value to
you. It's not as if the two vendors are armed camps that are never allowed
to interact with each other.

Oracle exploits PPC hardware quite nicely.

[deletia]

--
If you think that an 80G disk can hold HUNDRENDS of |||
hours of DV video then you obviously haven't used iMovie either. / | \

> >> DA Morgan wrote:
> >
> > Actually no. The very first post was made in comp.databases.oracle by a
> > shill for IBM which is where I saw it. If you folks hadn't lobbed the
> > first grenade no one would have shot back.
>
So you are calling me a shill? Is this part of your crusade to be
"courteous".