[Info-vax] Comment on the future of OpenVMS

[FrankS]

On Oct 26, 8:09 am, billg... at cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
> At my day job I have a number of "database servers".  That's all they do.
> The applications reside on other systems.  Microsoft also considers that
> a "best practice" for their SQL systems.  Why would Oracle not deliver
> a database engine that is a complete system?
>

Is the version of Microsoft OS that those servers are using any
different than the generic OS that Microsoft offers?

You commented that Oracle could thin out Solaris to basically make it
a purpose-built database server operating system.  Yet, Microsoft
hasn't done that, so your comparison isn't quite apples-apples.

I believe Microsoft's "best practice" of dedicating a server to the
database software is because they haven't figured out how to tune the
operating system to handle multiple heavy loads.  This is how server
farms have grown ridiculously large: one server per application
because the applications don't play nice together.