| Title: | DEC Rdb against the World |
| Moderator: | HERON::GODFRIND |
| Created: | Fri Jun 12 1987 |
| Last Modified: | Thu Feb 23 1995 |
| Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Number of topics: | 1348 |
| Total number of notes: | 5438 |
Why is it that the only database (except OS/400) which has been used in TPC-C benchmarks is Informix/Online? Is it because they have the best performance? Is it because they have the best price/performance? Is it because they are the only ones that are interested in doing the benchmarks? Is it because they pay for it? Is it because it is so much easier to implement with Informix? Is it because all the hw-vendors suddenly has agreed on using the same database to help the outside world compare between them? Is it because TPC-C is too difficult/impossible to implement for the others? Any answers or other suggestions? /Maja-Stina
| T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1332.1 | TPC-C makes some transaction model demands | NOVA::BERENSON | Fri Jan 28 1994 16:15 | 10 | |
It is because the only UNIX rdbms capable of getting decent TPC-C numbers is INFORMIX. ORACLE and SYBASE have transaction models that yield poor performance when you mix the need for consistency with complex transactions. Expect the TPC-C race to heat up significantly during 1994, with most major players coming out with releases tuned to handle the tougher requirements of TPC-C (and soon D). Hal | |||||
| 1332.2 | NOVA::R_ANDERSON | My timing is Digital. | Fri Jan 28 1994 18:37 | 5 | |
I believe it is also the case that some of the "Other" database products (NOT DEC Rdb, though) are not yet capable of meeting some of the rules required of the TPC-C benchmark. Rick | |||||
| 1332.3 | I believe they are functionally capable | NOVA::BERENSON | Fri Jan 28 1994 19:02 | 5 | |
re .2: Well, they are capable of meeting the requirements but in doing so their performance drops so terribly that they would never publish the results. | |||||
| 1332.4 | BROKE::SHAH | Amitabh "Amend Constitution: ban DECAF" | Mon Jan 31 1994 14:57 | 10 | |
Re. .2, .3 Yes, Hal is correct. Both Oracle and Sybase have working TPC-C implementations, but their performance is poorer than that of Informix. Oracle, e.g., has trouble implementing some of the transaction consistency requirements (repeatable reads) efficiently, since their model is that of optimistic concurrency control. Sybase should have trouble implementing transparent horizontal partitioning (look at their horrible design for implementing the History tables in TPC-A, which would be disallowed in -C). | |||||