Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Compaq -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (80179)	3/24/2000 4:15:00 PM
From: rudedog	Respond to of 97611

Jim - yes, it has been discussed - it was a cluster of 12 8-way ProLiants. They also did an 8-node cluster. It smoked everyone else too... IBM and SUNW sit on the TPC council along with CPQ. They would have protested the result if they really thought there was anything wrong. The "cheating" is just FUD since the CPQ system beat their best numbers by a big margin, and did it at less than half the cost... The $4.1M is just the cost of everything in the test configuration, it is not a single machine. I expect the "wildfire" machine to set an even higher bar. CPQ has a huge advantage in cluster technology - between Tandem and DEC, they have about anyone who knows anything about it. IBM also has some cluster people but nowhere near the depth that CPQ has. It was just a matter of time until CPQ did this - they had the capability to do this class of performance in 1996 using Tandem's database but there was no MSFT database to run, and Oracle does not scale well in that large a cluster. These results put pressure on Oracle to get back in the performance game.