Hi All,
For those that were following this thread, there are now two items on the Ixora
web site with comments from James Morle and Adrian Cockcroft on the matter. They
are both respected experts who have written books on scalability and performance
issues and so their opinions may be of interest
The following discussion assumes "big buss SMP" not MPP or any of its
derivations. Your mileage may vary.
If you have one CPU then all of the multiple CPU code in the kernel is
not used. There is a penalty that is paid for the second and subsequent cpu's.
So, the answer is... it depends!
Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Subject: More slower CPUs vs. fewer faster CPUs
I was wondering if it would be better to have three or four
relatively
slower CPUs than having only two faster ones.
I think I remember that Ixora says fewer faster C
..and so is the speed of the processors
>>> "Gene Sais" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 02/23/01 09:01AM >>>
And don't forget Oracle Power Unit Licensing costs? # cpus is a multiplier.
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 02/23 8:20 AM >>>
I was wondering if it would be better to have three or four relatively
slower CPUs
: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Subject:More slower CPUs vs. fewer faster CPUs
I was wondering if it would be better to have three or four
relatively
slower CPUs than having only two faster ones.
I think I remember that Ixora says fewer faster CPUs is better
And don't forget Oracle Power Unit Licensing costs? # cpus is a multiplier.
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 02/23 8:20 AM >>>
I was wondering if it would be better to have three or four relatively
slower CPUs than having only two faster ones.
I think I remember that Ixora says fewer faster CPUs is better
I was wondering if it would be better to have three or four relatively
slower CPUs than having only two faster ones.
I think I remember that Ixora says fewer faster CPUs is better because the
CPUs are constantly negotiating who should do what. The more CPUs exist the
more time-consuming the deba
