[geeks] Oracle dbs on Sun T2000?

[Francois Dion]

On 6/20/06, William Enestvedt <William.Enestvedt at jwu.edu> wrote:
> Has anyone played with Oracle databases on Sun's "Cool Threads" T2000 or
> T1000 servers? What were your experiences?

I haven't, but let me interject this: if you are paying for the Oracle
licenses on a per cpu basis, it would not be cost effective at all.
We've looked at it, and that's why we didn't even consider upping our
4800 to 4900 (dual core). In fact, when it comes to Oracle Apps,
Oracle Database or App server, due to CPU licensing, these machines
dont look too interesting. Now if you run a web or app server that
dont have cpu licenses tied to it, then I'd be all over these T2000.

>    I have some pretty well-equipped Sun servers running Oracle 9 and 10
> databases (V480s and V890s) which are usually pretty busy

Run Solaris 10 across the board, you'll see some performance gain,
particularly on the network I/O. Our DBA also always look at what is
running and make sure he tunes the database. Depending on your load,
you probably are not running out of CPU steam, but might be I/O bound.
What disk setup are you using? Might want to upgrade that instead.

> curious whether I could get more work done with multiple threads each on
> multiple UltraSPARC III cores than I do with fewer, faster UltraSPARC IV
> CPUs.

Another thing to think about, a 4800 (well 4900 now with U IV) never
go down for anything if they are setup right. You can hotswap
anything, including PCI cards thru the IO boats. T2000, you'd need a
minimum of 2, and Oracle RAC. RAC is more software license, altough
you no longer need Sun Cluster (that was a pain and yet more cost -
they need to make this a lot less complex and a lot more robust).
We've been running RAC then not running RAC, still not clear which
approach is best. It's all a complexity - RAS tradeoff.

Now, if your oracle license is per users then it makes sense. I'm
surprised then that you are running out of steam on your current
hardware.

Francois