Re: Which SQL is the best for servers?

hpuxrac wrote:
> On Feb 16, 1:09 am, pg <pen(dot)(dot)(dot)(at)catholic(dot)org> wrote:
>> I am involved with a SQL server project. The server would be used in a
>> very heavy duty environment, with hundreds of thousands, if not
>> millions of database enquiries per minutes.
>>
>> The server would run Linux or one of the BSD variant, with at least
>> 32GB of RAM. We are not very certain of the hardware specs yet because
>> we haven't decided on which SQL to use.
>>
>> I know that Oracle, MySQL and PostgreSQL are all designed for heavy
>> duty uses.
>>
>> And I checked all available online resources for a SQL comparison and
>> all I could find is some articles dated 2005 or so !
>>
>> So, here's my questions:
>>
>> 1. Are there any recent SQL comparison article available?
>>
>> 2. Since the server may come with only 32GB of RAM, which SQL can run
>> the "leanest" - that is, not a memory hog?
>>
>> 3. The server might also become a web-server, which SQL can tie itself
>> to the Web-based enquiry they best?
>>
>> Please give me your suggestion / opinion. Thank you !!
>
> Hundreds of thousands or millions of queries per minute on 1 32 gig
> server?
>
> Sounds pretty unlikely.
>
> Oracle or DB2 are probably the only 2 viable choices but it doesn't
> sound like a good plan from the get go.

For that possible transaction rate I'd suggest something
other than an x86-based server; an entry-level zSeries
running zVM and multiple instances of Linux-for-zSeries
comes to mind.

--
-- Marten Kemp
(Fix name and ISP to reply)