While Oracle is big, I kind of doubt that they could ever keep up with Intel. Even in turn-key appliance servers (sort of an iMac of databases, pre-configured computer), Intel/AMD will outstrip them in performance and they won't be able to stay up to date.
The only place I can think that this would be useful is routers. In a turn-key appliance like that that does a very specialized job (especially one that requires custom silicon to do the routing fast enough), SPARC could make sense. It would make it harder
While this is generally true, you have the problem of Sparcs historically SUCKING badly. Back in the day that Alpha was still around, the rule of thumb was 1 Alpha processor for every four Sparcs.
Sun has kind of been the Microsoft of the Unix market.
Just because your task is likely to be IO bound, that doesn't mean that you can completely ignore the processor to the point of turning an IO bound problem into a CPU bound one.
Saying something sucks because it's slower than an Alpha is a bit of a stretch. Digital made a policy of never releasing a new Alpha unless it was faster than anything else on the market.
Good for routers? (Score:5, Insightful)
While Oracle is big, I kind of doubt that they could ever keep up with Intel. Even in turn-key appliance servers (sort of an iMac of databases, pre-configured computer), Intel/AMD will outstrip them in performance and they won't be able to stay up to date.
The only place I can think that this would be useful is routers. In a turn-key appliance like that that does a very specialized job (especially one that requires custom silicon to do the routing fast enough), SPARC could make sense. It would make it harder
Re: (Score:2)
Fast CPU doesn't mean fast system.
Re: (Score:2)
No, but with database applications you go for IO first, CPU second.
Re:Good for routers? (Score:2)
While this is generally true, you have the problem of Sparcs historically
SUCKING badly. Back in the day that Alpha was still around, the rule of
thumb was 1 Alpha processor for every four Sparcs.
Sun has kind of been the Microsoft of the Unix market.
Just because your task is likely to be IO bound, that doesn't mean that
you can completely ignore the processor to the point of turning an IO
bound problem into a CPU bound one.
Sparc has a similar relationship to x86.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's one thing to be faster and quite another to be FOUR TIMES FASTER.
That would be kind of like Macs coming with half clocked core solos not unlike what you get with an AppleTV.