benchmarkingblog

Elisabeth Stahl on Benchmarking and IT Optimization

Archive for the ‘Oracle’ Category

New Oracle M5 and T5 SAP Benchmark Results: No SPARC at all

with 14 comments

If you were hoping for some Last Friday Night excitement from Oracle’s new SPARC servers announcement this week, we haven’t seen it yet. Oracle just this morning published two SAP SD 2-tier benchmark results, one on the M5-32 and one on the T5-8.

The IBM POWER7+ with DB2 10 result from back in September was 1.3x greater per core than the M5 and 1.9x greater than the T5 result.(1) The IBM average database request time was also much better and the CPU utilization of the IBM system was also more effective.

Will the sun come out tomorrow for Oracle?

************************************************

(1)IBM Power 780 (3.72 GHz) two-tier SAP SD Standard Application Benchmark result (SAP enhancement package 5 for the SAP ERP 6.0 application: 12 processors / 96 cores / 384 threads, POWER7+, 1536 GB memory, 57,024 SD benchmark users, running AIX® 7.1 and DB2® 10, dialog resp.: 0.98s, line items/hour: 6,234,330, Dialog steps/hour: 18,703,000, SAPS: 311,720, DB time (dialog/ update): 0.009s / 0.014s, CPU utilization: 99%, Certification #2012033

Oracle SPARC Server M5-32 SAP SD 2-tier result of 85,050 users, Average dialog response time: 0.80 seconds, Fully processed order line items per hour: 9,452,000,Dialog steps per hour: 28,356,000,SAPS: 472,600,Average database request time (dialog/update): 0.018 sec / 0.044 sec,CPU utilization of central server: 82%,Operating system, central server: Solaris 11,RDBMS: Oracle 11g,SAP Business Suite software: SAP enhancement package 5 for SAP ERP 6.0,32 processors / 192 cores / 1536 threads,SPARC M5, 3.60 GHz, 16 KB (D) and 16 KB (I) L1 cache and128 KB L2 cache per core, 48 MB L3 cache per processor,4096 GB main memory,Certification #2013009

Oracle SPARC Server T5-8 SAP SD 2-tier result of 40,000 users,Average dialog response time: 0.86 seconds,Fully processed order line items per hour: 4,419,000,Dialog steps per hour: 13,257,000,SAPS: 220,950,Average database request time (dialog/update): 0.049 sec / 0.131 sec,CPU utilization of central server: 88%, Operating system, central server: Solaris 11,RDBMS: Oracle 11g,SAP Business Suite software: SAP enhancement package 5 for SAP ERP 6.0, 8 processors / 128 cores / 1024 threads,SPARC T5, 3.60 GHz, 16 KB (D) and 16 KB (I) L1 cache and 128 KB L2 cache per core, 8 MB L3 cache per processor,2048 GB main memory,Certification #2013008.

Source: http://www.sap.com; Results current as of 03/25/12.

SAP and all SAP logos are trademarks or registered trademarks of SAP AG in Germany and in several other countries. Other names may be trademarks of their respective owners.

The postings on this site solely reflect the personal views of the author and do not necessarily represent the views, positions, strategies or opinions of IBM or IBM management.

technorati tags: , , ,,,,,,,,,,,

Written by benchmarkingblog

March 25, 2013 at 12:28 pm

Posted in Oracle, SAP, SPARC T5

Tagged with , , , , ,

Oracle, Blowin’ in the Wind

leave a comment »

Oracle announced this morning the general availability of the Oracle Database Appliance X3-2. It now supports virtualization.

Hmmm, not exactly groundbreaking dare I say.

Along with this Oracle announcement were many claims of bigger and better — than a previous version.
With no real data and no real comparisons. And all I could think of was a Saturday morning a couple of months ago.

You see, I was in an industrial supply store this one Saturday morning (the things we do for love). Looking at, of all things, leaf blowers.

  • Some models of these new leaf blowers claimed to blow harder that others. Surely harder than the old broken one at home. Which never really blew all that well. In fact, I probably ended up using my beloved rake more than that big hunk of plastic.
  • These new leaf blowers claimed to be bigger and better. That meant that they actually weighed a ton more and had to be converted from a hand held model to a huge backpack. Ghostbuster time. And you needed earplugs.
  • They let you try it out in the store. But instead of heavy wet leaves, they had you blow strips of paper.
  • The advertised pricing did not include the expensive oil that you needed for it — without that specific oil, the machine would die.

So it comes down to the fact that claims are similar all over. But does the appliance finish the job fast, reliably, and at the right total price — so that you can get to what you really want to be doing.

************************************************

The postings on this site solely reflect the personal views of the author and do not necessarily represent the views, positions, strategies or opinions of IBM or IBM management.

technorati tags: , , ,,,,,,,,,

,,

Written by benchmarkingblog

March 5, 2013 at 11:06 am

Posted in Appliance, Oracle

Tagged with , , ,

Oracle, I Knew You Were Trouble When You Walked In (to SPECjbb2013)

with one comment

I’m always on the lookout for anything that helps me eat well. My newest interest these days is a type of rye crisp cracker that looks like cardboard, tastes a bit better, but has absolutely no fat. (They are really good if you put a huge slice of brie on them.)

I also love reading about nutrition. I love Bloomberg’s ban on big soda. I love the concept of using color to focus on a well-rounded and healthy diet. Does lime jello count in the green group?

Pomegranate juice, which has many claims on being good for you, was one of those things. Deep red, and also great for an amazing sauce reduction for chicken. Well, I recently read that the Federal Trade Commission just barred claims of pomegranate juice helping heart disease and other ailments until truly proven — based on deceptive advertising claims.

Which reminded me of something else. Oracle recently claimed a “world record” in the SPECjbb2013 Java benchmark. What you need to know is that this benchmark does not have 100 other results to compare to. It doesn’t have 20. It doesn’t even have 10. This “world record result” is based on just two other published results. Both by Intel. With older JDK. And fewer and older processors.

Like when your black lab starts to sit on your friend’s chihuahua. Or a claim that your juice cures cancer.

************************************************

SPEC, SPECint, SPECfp, SPECjbb, SPECweb, SPECjAppServer, SPECjEnterprise, SPECjvm, SPECvirt, SPECompM, SPECompL, SPECsfs, SPECpower, SPEC MPI and SPECpower_ssj are trademarks of the Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation (SPEC).

The postings on this site solely reflect the personal views of the author and do not necessarily represent the views, positions, strategies or opinions of IBM or IBM management.

technorati tags: , , ,,,,,,,,,,

,

Written by benchmarkingblog

February 25, 2013 at 10:41 am

Posted in Oracle, SPECjbb

Tagged with ,

It Really Does Take Two to Tango, Oracle

leave a comment »

10x better, 95% reduction, 60x increase.

I saw these claims recently in press releases from Oracle.

Sounds rather nice. Until you start thinking about what a comparison really is.

A comparison involves the consideration of two things. You must have something to compare to something else. In mathematics, an inequality is a relation that holds between two values when they are different. Not just empty promises.

When you throw around “comparisons” about complex issues of application deployment, you really should mention what data you are comparing to. Rather than leaving it in thin air.

Are you comparing the performance of your newest processor with one from 10 years ago ? Are you comparing the deployment of your system with a competitor’s truck ?

That’s why it makes sense to look at real data. Like here. And here. And here. And here.

Remember that 60 times a very small number still comes out to be a very small number. And of course, as we know from the multiplicative property of zero, 60 times 0 is still 0.

************************************************

The postings on this site solely reflect the personal views of the author and do not necessarily represent the views, positions, strategies or opinions of IBM or IBM management.

technorati tags: , , ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Written by benchmarkingblog

December 10, 2012 at 11:30 am

Posted in Cloud, Exalogic, Oracle

Tagged with

Lackluster Larry

with 2 comments

As we await that big wave called OpenWorld to reach our shores, let’s take a look at what we have actually seen from Oracle in the last few days.

  • Questions on Oracle’s latest earnings and disappointing performance in hardware
  • A new ad on the front page of the Wall Street Journal that attempts to make a groundbreaking statement about the very old news that there are public clouds and there are private clouds.
  • A press release on a new TPC-C OLTP benchmark result.The problem is that it’s actually a Cisco benchmark result that just happens to use some Oracle software. And the problem is that the Cisco system in the comparison is 2 years newer, needs 2x the number of cores, and uses over 60% more storage than the IBM result cited. Even so, the older IBM system is 1.49x times the performance per core of the Cisco system. (1)

Based on this news plus what I’ve heard may be coming that huge OpenWorld wave may turn out to be merely a minor ripple in our IT landscape.

************************************************

(1)Cisco UCS C240 M3, 1,609,186.39 tpmC, $0.47/tpmC, (2 processors/16 cores/32 threads) available 9/27/12 vs. IBM Power 780 Server Model 9179-MHB with IBM DB2 9.5, 1,200,011.00 tpmC, $0.69/tpmC, available 10/13/10 (2 processors/8 cores/32 threads). Results current as of 9/28/12. Source: http://www.tpc.org.
TPC-C ,TPC-H, and TPC-E are trademarks of the Transaction Performance Processing Council (TPPC).
The postings on this site solely reflect the personal views of the author and do not necessarily represent the views, positions, strategies or opinions of IBM or IBM management.

technorati tags: , , ,,,,,,,,,,,,

Written by benchmarkingblog

September 28, 2012 at 11:42 am

Posted in Cisco, Cloud, Oracle, TPC-C

Tagged with , ,

Notes from Oracle, Chapter 3 in the Series

leave a comment »

Once again, I received a marketing email from Oracle this morning. And once again, hoping that it contained exciting new data on the T5, I was sadly disappointed.

  • I can not fathom why they continue to address the email to a bizarre truncation of my first name. I continue to question my confidence in a company that specializes in data.
  • The note stated “According to our records, you have older SPARC systems.” I should really check in my garage. Again, ironic for a company that wants clients to use them for data and record keeping.
  • The email links to a new video. From April.
  • The video claims a humongous performance improvement with SPARC T4. When you watch the video, it’s actually merely a comparison from Oracle’s very own baby M3000s consolidated to T4’s. So I would definitely expect even more than humongous.

I’ve gotten some notes and tweets about how amusing these “Notes from Oracle” are. And we all could certainly use a laugh these days. So please, Mr. Oracle Business Development Manager, keep those cards and letters coming.

************************************************

The postings on this site solely reflect the personal views of the author and do not necessarily represent the views, positions, strategies or opinions of IBM or IBM management.

technorati tags: , , ,,,,,,,,,,,,

Written by benchmarkingblog

September 6, 2012 at 12:13 pm

Posted in M3000, Oracle, SPARC T4

Tagged with ,

Oracle’s Historical Fiction

leave a comment »

I love reading historical fiction. It’s somewhat like the real thing, but not quite. And definitely more exciting.

This morning I received another email from Oracle that reminded me of just that.

  • The note was once again addressed to “Elis”. I can not fathom why they continue to truncate my first name to only four letters. Doesn’t give me much confidence in a software company that specializes in data.
  • The note contained a quote from an unnamed “Infrastructure Architect” from an anonymous “Major Credit Card” company on Oracle/Sun benefits. I’m thinking that just maybe that architect didn’t really want to be known throughout history for that one.
  • The note stated “Our records show that you have older SPARC systems.” How funny, maybe they’re in my basement hidden behind the washing machine. Again, a data company that surely got that historical data wrong.
  • The note links to an independent report on customer perspectives. The report is from May. May 2011. A lifetime ago in the IT world.
  • The independent report is full of various quotes, all from anonymous people at anonymous companies.
  • This independent report is written by a company called ORC. Hmmm, have I seen those letters somewhere before?

************************************************

The postings on this site solely reflect the personal views of the author and do not necessarily represent the views, positions, strategies or opinions of IBM or IBM management.

technorati tags: , , ,,,,,,,,,,,

,

Written by benchmarkingblog

August 30, 2012 at 11:55 am

Posted in Oracle, SPARC T4

Tagged with ,

%d bloggers like this: