Archive for the 'Exadata X2-8' Category

Oracle’s Timeline, Copious Benchmarks And Internal Deployments Prove Exadata Is The Worlds First (Best?) OLTP Machine – Part I

I recently took a peek at this online, interactive history of Oracle Corporation. When I got to the year 2008, I was surprised to see no mention of the production release of Exadata–the HP Oracle Database Machine. The first release of Exadata occurred in September 2008.

Once I advanced to 2009, however, I found mention of Exadata but I also found a couple of errors:

  • The text says “Sun Oracle Database Machine” yet the photograph is that of an HP Oracle Database Machine (minor, if not comical, error)
  • The text says Exadata “wins benchmarks against key competitors” (major error, unbelievably so)

What’s First, Bad News or Good News?

Bad News

The only benchmark Exadata has ever been used in was this 1TB scale TPC-H in 2009 with HP Blades.  Be aware, as I pointed out in this blog post, that particular TPC-H was an in-memory Parallel Query benchmark. Exadata features were not used. Exadata was a simple block storage device. The table and index scans were conducted against cached blocks in the Oracle SGAs configured in the 64 nodes of the cluster. Exadata served as nothing more than persistent storage for the benchmark. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying there was no physical I/O. The database was loaded as a timed test (per TPC-H spec) which took 142 minutes and the first few moments of query processing required physical I/O so the data could be pulled up into the aggregate SGAs. The benchmark also requires updates. However, these ancillary I/O operations did not lean on Exadata feature nor are they comparable to a TPC-H that centers on physical I/O.  So could using Exadata in an in-memory Parallel Query benchmark be classified as winning “benchmarks against key competitors?” Surely not but I’m willing to hear from dissenters on that. Now that the bad news is out of the way I’ll get to what I’m actually blogging about. I’m blogging about the good news.

Good News

The good news I’d like to point out from screenshot (below) of Oracle’s interactive history is that it spares us the torment of referring to the Sun Oracle Exadata Machine as the First Database Machine for OLTP as touted in this press release from that time frame.  A system that offers 60-fold more capacity for random reads than random writes cannot possibly be mistaken as a special-built OLTP machine.  I’m delighted that the screen shot below honestly represents the design center for Exadata which is DW/BI. For that reason, Exadata features have nothing at all to do with OLTP. That’s a good readon the term OLTP is not seen in that screen shot. That is good news.

OLTP does not trigger Smart Scans thus no offload processing (filtration,projection, storage index, etc). Moreover, Hybrid Columnar Compression has nothing to do with OLTP, except perhaps, in an information life cycle management hierarchy. So, there’s the good news. Exadata wasn’t an OLTP machine in Oracle’s timeline and it still is not an OLTP machine. No, Oracle was quite right for not putting the “First OLTP Machine” lark into that timeline. After all, 2009 is quite close to 40 years after the true first OLTP Machine which was CICS/IMS.  I don’t understand the compulsion to make outlandish claims.

Bad News

Yes, more bad news. Oracle has never published an Exadata benchmark result even with their own benchmarks. That’s right. Oracle has a long history of publishing Oracle Application Standard benchmarks–but no Exadata results.

I’ve gone on the record as siding with Oracle for not publishing TPC benchmarks with Exadata for many reasons.  However, I cannot think of any acceptable excuse for why Oracle would pitch Exadata to you as best for Oracle Applications when a) there are no OLTP features in Exadata*, b) Oracle Corporation does not use Exadata for their ERP and c) there is no benchmark proof for Exadata OLTP/ERP capabilities.

Closing Thoughts

Given all I’ve just said, why is it that (common knowledge) the majority of Exadata units shipping to customers are quarter-rack for non-DW/BI use cases? Has Exadata just become the modern replacement for “[...] nobody ever got fired for buying [...]?” Is that how platforms are chosen these days? How did we get to that point of lowered-expectations?

Enjoy the screen shot of memory lane, wrong photo, bad, good and all:

* I am aware of the Exadata Smart Flash Log feature.

Exadata Database Machine X2-2 or X2-8? Sure! Why Not? Part II.

In my recent post entitled Exadata Database Machine X2-2 or X2-8? Sure! Why Not? Part I, I started to address the many questions folks are sending my way about what factors to consider when choosing between Exadata Database Machine X2-8 versus Exadata Database Machine X2-2. This post continues that thread.

As my friend Greg Rahn points out in his recent post about Exadata, the latest Exadata Storage Server is based on Intel Xeon 5600 (Westmere EP) processors. The Exadata Storage Server is the same whether the database grid is X2-2 or X2-8. The X2-2 database hosts are also based on Intel Xeon 5600. On the other hand, the X2-8 database hosts are based on Intel Xeon 7500 (Nehalem EX). This is a relevant distinction when thinking about database encryption.

Transparent Database Encryption

In his recent post, Greg brings up the topic of Oracle Database Transparent Data Encryption (TDE). As Greg points out, the new Exadata Storage Server software is able to leverage Intel Advanced Encryption Standard New Instructions (Intel AES-NI) found in the Intel Integrated Performance Primitives (Intel IPP) library because the processors in the storage servers are Intel Xeon 5600 (Westmere EP). Think of this as “hardware-assist.” However, in the case of the database hosts in the X2-8, there is no hardware-assist for TDE as Nehalem EX does not offer support for the necessary instructions. Westmere EX will—someday. So what does this mean?

TDE and Compression? Unlikely Cousins?

At first glance one would think there is nothing in common between TDE and compression. However, in an Exadata environment there is storage offload processing and for that reason roles are important to understand. That is, understanding what gets done is sometimes not as important as who is doing what.

When I speak to people about Exadata I tend to draw the mental picture of an “upper” and “lower” half. While the count of servers in each grid is not split 50/50 by any means, thinking about Exadata in this manner makes understanding certain features a lot simpler. Allow me to explain.

Compression

In the case of compressing data, all work is done by the upper half (the database grid). On the other hand, decompression effort takes place in either the upper or lower half depending on certain criteria.

  • Upper Half Compression. Always.
  • Lower Half Compression. Never
  • Lower Half Decompression. Data compressed with Hybrid Columnar Compression (HCC) is decompressed in the Exadata Storage Servers when accessed via Smart Scan. Visit my post about what triggers a Smart Scan for more information.
  • Upper Half Decompression. With all compression types, other than HCC, decompression effort takes place in the upper half. When accessed without Smart Scan, HCC data is also decompressed in the upper half.

Encryption

In the case of encryption, the upper/lower half breakout is as follows:

  • Upper Half Encryption. Always. Data is always encrypted by code executing in the database grid. If the processors are Intel Xeon 5600 (Westmere EP), as is the case with X2-2, there is hardware assist via the IPP library. The X2-8 is built on Nehalem EX and therefore does not offer hardware-assist encryption.
  • Lower Half Encryption. Never.
  • Lower Half Decryption. Smart Scan only. If data is not being accessed via Smart Scan the blocks are returned to the database host and buffered in the SGA (see the Seven Fundamentals). Both the X2-2 and X2-8 are attached to Westmere EP-based storage servers. To that end, both of these configurations benefit from hardware-assist decryption via the IPP libarary. I reiterate, however, that this hardware-assist lower-half decryption only occurs during Smart Scan.
  • Upper Half Decryption. Always in the case of data accessed without Smart Scan. In the case of X2-2, this upper-half decryption benefits from hardware-assist via the IPP library.

That pretty much covers it and now we see commonality between compression and encryption. The commonality is mostly related to whether or not a query is being serviced via Smart Scan.

That’s Not All

If HCC data is also stored in encrypted form, a Smart Scan is able to filter out vast amount of encrypted data without even touching it. That is, HCC short-circuits a lot of decryption cost. And, even though Exadata is really fast, it is always faster to not do something at all than to shift into high gear and do it as fast as possible.

Exadata Database Machine X2-2 or X2-8? Sure! Why Not? Part I.

I’ve been getting a lot of questions about why one would choose Exadata Database Machine X2-8 over Exadata Database Machine X2-2. That’s actually a tough question, however, some topics do spring to mind. I’ll start a list:

  1. The Exadata Database Machine X2-8 only comes in full-rack configurations. No way to “start small.”
  2. The Exadata Database Machine X2-2 only (immediately) supports Oracle Linux. If Solaris is attractive to you then the X2-2 is not an option at the time of this blog entry. That is slated to change soon.
  3. Database Host RAM. The aggregate database grid RAM in a full-rack X2-2 system is 768 GB but 2 TB with the X2-8. The list is quite long for areas that benefit from the additional memory. Such topics as large user counts (consolidation or otherwise), join processing, and very large SGA come to mind. And, regarding large SGA, don’t forget, the Exadata Database Machine supports in-memory Parallel Query as well.

Not on the numbered list is the more sensitive topic of processor power. While these sorts of things are very workload-dependent, I’d go with 16 Intel Xeon 7500 (Nehalem EX) processors over 16 Intel Xeon 5600 (Westmere EP) for most any workload.

So, readers, what reasons would motivate you in one direction or the other?


EMC Employee Disclaimer

The opinions and interests expressed on EMC employee blogs are the employees' own and do not necessarily represent EMC's positions, strategies or views. EMC makes no representation or warranties about employee blogs or the accuracy or reliability of such blogs. When you access employee blogs, even though they may contain the EMC logo and content regarding EMC products and services, employee blogs are independent of EMC and EMC does not control their content or operation. In addition, a link to a blog does not mean that EMC endorses that blog or has responsibility for its content or use.

This disclaimer was put into place on March 23, 2011.

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,937 other followers

Oracle ACE Program Status

Click It

website metrics

Fond Memories

Copyright

All content is © Kevin Closson and "Kevin Closson's Blog: Platforms, Databases, and Storage", 2006-2013. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Kevin Closson and Kevin Closson's Blog: Platforms, Databases, and Storage with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,937 other followers