SUMMARY: Comparison: S-station20 to S-server1000 w/ Sybase?

From: Kurt Radtke (criterion1!
Date: Mon Jun 06 1994 - 11:08:00 CDT

Briefly, there are no hard conclusions YET, but there were a couple
replies from persons just beginning to operate in an environment
similar to what we may have coming up.

First, the original posting:

        I have just been asked to seek out opinions and/or comparisons
of the SPARCstation 20 and the SPARCserver 1000 relative to a Sybase
environment. Our needs will initially involve only Sybase access and
probably a 4.x OS (we are not migrating to Solaris 2.x until near the
end of the year). Our primary concern here is CPU functionality, not
external device selection or network connectivity, however, any experience
you might like to share regarding a SUN being used as a Sybase server
to a Novell LAN will also be welcome.
        If you have any experience at all with Sybase and at least one
of the above machines, please email me. Responses will be summarized and
I will also share our selection (if timely) and the reasons for it.

        I must now say that I should never have included any statement
about which operating system we are currently using, as it has no bearing
on what we'll use for the new "server". We will be able to go either way.
My error, but thanks anyway to all those who pointed out the limitations.
        There really were no specific recommendations made, but there was
some good advice. Following are excerpts from a few replies.

  Since you won't be going to Solaris 2.x til the end of next year, you
  aught to look toward the SS-20 since the 1000 won't run Solaris 1.x,
  that is if your need is near term. If you are looking longer term
  then look to the 1000, because it is more expandable in terms of
  multiple CPUs and memory. Also since the 1000 uses the X{D}Bus
  rather then the MBus the memory through put on the 1000 is higher
  on the SS-20. Though the SS-20 uses faster CPUs now this is a
  marketing thing and not anything technical - the 1000 will eventually
  come with them faster CPUs too.
There was a question of the same nature on this mailing list for SS1000
suggestions/recommendations/ideas/opinions. Check sun managers archives for
" SUMMARY: SS/1000 Comments Requested ", dated around May 26.

We at our site have almost decided to go with Sparc20's as primary
sybase servers with OS release 4.1.3_U1 Rev B. Our DBA's are
satisified with sybase performance on 20's. These 3 servers will be serving
for 10 regional offices with HUGE databases on them.
Please send me summary or any responses you get for
Sparc20/sybase-server/4.1.3_U1-Rev-B combo.
You have absolutely no choice but to go with a uniprocessor SS20. The 1000
only runs Solaris 2.x. Start with a SS20-61, and upgrade to a 612 or 514 when
you move to Solaris 2.x.
In a multiprocessor setup Solaris 2.3 is much better than 4.1.3 - the
differences between the two might seem daunting, but since I "got
serious" and upgrade dmy system I actually find that it isn't too bad.
Lots of public domain software ports strasight over with only a
recompile. The moral is don't be too scared about going to Solaris 2.

Conclusions: The one reference above to "satisfied DBA's" was the only solid
comment regarding Sybase. There were 13 responses all together to-date and
none were critical of either machine's performance. The consensus was
that we should make our decision based upon projected needs beyond the
initial purchase requirements; that either machine will do for now, dis-
regarding the operating system limitation.

Thanks to all for your replies, and especially to those with whom I will
be in further contact as their testing continues and ours begins.

 Criterion Investment Mgmt. Co. (713) 963-5273 FAX (713) 963-5280
  1990 Post Oak Blvd. Ste. 1100 Kurt Radtke - Systems Administrator
   Houston, Texas 77056-3890 kurt@Criterion.COM or cimc@SCCSI.COM

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Sep 28 2001 - 23:09:03 CDT