1748280 Members
3627 Online
108761 Solutions
New Discussion юеВ

Re: HP-UX vs. Windows

 
SOLVED
Go to solution
D Block 2
Respected Contributor

Re: HP-UX vs. Windows

Elena,

re: cutting support costs

If you plan on growing your Storage, then you might look into faster I/O on newer hardware.. using 2G FibreChannel HP cards into a FC switch, into FC Mass Storage. The ROI is worth the speed of transaction response-time for Oracle.

If you plan on cutting costs with ProLiant equipment, you might try using VMWARE Linux - having 2 Linux OS running at the same time. But invest in maximum memory on your ProLiant.

If you want to save on floor space, might think about Server Migration to larger servers that can have multiple OSs that are h/w isolated, Hard-Partitions. The CIO loves to hear about server migration and consolidation into fewer cabinets and less hardware maintenace charges.

Here's the bottom line: speed of transactions. If you need reliable and fast I/O, the only choice is Oracle on HP-UX as compared to Windows (or even Linux).

One other choice might be Linux Clustering using Oracle RAC, but keep in mind, Linux on a ProLiant that is max'ed out with I/O, will have performance problems as compared to the big iron HP PA-RISC servers (rpxxxx).



Golf is a Good Walk Spoiled, Mark Twain.
Gerard Leclercq
Trusted Contributor

Re: HP-UX vs. Windows

In the the small company where I work, there is about 140 PCs managed by one full time administrator.
I manage myself 60 hpux workstations, but about 10% of my time ...

All our Oracle databases are on hpux servers.

So we know there is a big difference.

The main problem with Windows is that it does not manage correctly the memory. To avoid this problem, one put a lot of memory in the machine.

Gerard.
dirk dierickx
Honored Contributor

Re: HP-UX vs. Windows

Your manager is a fool. Sure, the current trend today is to cut costs by throwing out those RISC boxes, which cost an arm and a leg. But replacing them with Windows is *NOT* they way to go. What you want to have is the same unix environment without the costs. This is where the intel machines running Linux/BSD come in place. The latests machines are so much faster and although they might be less reliable you can buy 4 or more boxes for the price of one risc box, put them in a cluster or in case of oracle something like RAC and all should be well.
You should forget about windows, for all the arguments made in the previous posts.
Rick Garland
Honored Contributor

Re: HP-UX vs. Windows

1st off, you are dealing with UNIX folks here, our decision will be somewhat biased but for good reason. Winblows does not cut it!

There is no doubt that winblows now controls the user desktops. How much longer remains to be seen with Linux able to do most (if not ALL) of the tasks that winblows can do.

Winblows has some uses in the data center. What I see most of is doing DNS and sendmail gateway. Beyond that I see nothing but trouble for winblows. It cannot handle a big Oracle database, small ones winblows does OK with.

Essentially if you are doing major, mission critical applications you will encounter more problems and downtime using winblows.

(I suspect your manager is looking to cut costs. There is no doubt that a winblows system is cheaper up front but the ROI is much better on a UNIX system.)
Dave Wherry
Esteemed Contributor

Re: HP-UX vs. Windows

I am very much in agreement with what the others have said. Unix is the choice for performance, managability and stability. That of course comes with a price. You truly do get what you pay for.

You can certainly get a Windows solution at a lower purchase price. Then you need to think about the managment expense and what down time costs your company. The ROI discussion has already been brought up and Unix wins.

It sounds as if your manager is concerned with the costs of those maintenance contracts. HP is not different than any other vendor. They raise the price of support on older systems because it costs them money to keep techs trained and stock older parts. They push you to new systems which come with warranty coverage included. You may need to uplift that coverage but, it's usually still cheaper than the coverage on the old systems.

The space those old system takes up is another problem you mentioned. A K460 is 17U high. Compared to a four processor K460 you can get comparable or better performance with a single processor rp2405 or an rx1600. And, each of those servers are 1U high. As mentioned earlier you can also look at the larger systems which will allow you to scale up or out with either discrete systems or partitioning. Space problem laid to rest.

One other item. You can move into a new rp system now which solves the current problems. You then have the option of upgrading these in the future with the PA-8900 when it comes out or going to Itanium. Or, you could move to Itanium now (rx line) running UX with all of the advantages previously mentioned. Or, if Windows is truly a better fit for any of your applications, run Windows on Itanium with better performance than those ProLiants.