Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Writer:
Introduction:
In this white paper, we discuss the main reasons why customers might not want to implement
Oracle Real Application Clusters (RAC) in their database solution. We also visit common
database scenarios where a SQL Server solution makes more sense than Oracle RAC. Finally,
we explain common myths or misunderstanding about Oracle RAC. It is assumed that the
reader has a working knowledge of Oracle RAC and Microsoft SQL Server concepts and
features.
Copyright
The information contained in this document represents the current view of Microsoft Corporation
on the issues discussed as of the date of publication. Because Microsoft must respond to
changing market conditions, it should not be interpreted to be a commitment on the part of
Microsoft, and Microsoft cannot guarantee the accuracy of any information presented after the
date of publication.
This white paper is for informational purposes only. MICROSOFT MAKES NO WARRANTIES,
EXPRESS, IMPLIED, OR STATUTORY, AS TO THE INFORMATION IN THIS DOCUMENT.
Complying with all applicable copyright laws is the responsibility of the user. Without limiting the
rights under copyright, no part of this document may be reproduced, stored in, or introduced into
a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording, or otherwise), or for any purpose, without the express written
permission of Microsoft Corporation.
Microsoft may have patents, patent applications, trademarks, copyrights, or other intellectual
property rights covering subject matter in this document. Except as expressly provided in any
written license agreement from Microsoft, the furnishing of this document does not give you any
license to these patents, trademarks, copyrights, or other intellectual property.
Microsoft & SQL Server are trademarks of the Microsoft group of companies.
Contents
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... 4
Cloud Computing for Scalability ................................................................................................. 6
Few customers deploying Oracle RAC in production.................................................................. 7
Oracle RAC is too costly ............................................................................................................ 9
Microsoft provides equivalent functionalities with lower TCO ....................................................10
High-Availability (HA) .............................................................................................................10
SQL Server Solution in High-Availability ................................................................................11
Scale-out OLTP applications .................................................................................................12
SQL Server Solution in Scale-out OLTP applications ............................................................12
Data Warehouse applications ................................................................................................13
SQL Server Solution in Data Warehouse applications ...........................................................13
Consolidation and Private Cloud............................................................................................14
SQL Server Solution in Consolidation and Private Cloud .......................................................14
Common myths or misunderstanding about Oracle RAC ..........................................................14
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................16
Executive Summary
Oracle RAC and its predecessor Oracle Parallel Server (OPS) have been around for about 20
years since the first release of OPS in 1992. Oracle RAC is a complex and archaic architecture
that might not be suitable for customers, especially in the cloud computing era. Newer cloud
computing applications require much larger scale (more nodes) than the practical scalability
limits of Oracle RAC. Customers should look at cloud computing architectures for their
applications, considering longer term needs (> 12 months) in application scalability in this new
cloud computing era. Microsoft has a strong vision and offerings to usher customers to the full
benefits of next generation cloud computing paradigm.
In addition, Microsoft offers database solution to meet customers requirements with much
better value than Oracle RAC. Customers need to pay a much higher cost for Oracle RAC
compared with SQL Server solution that will satisfy the equivalent requirements. The main
question customers must ask themselves is whether it is justified to deploy Oracle RAC as a
solution where it could cost more than 5X the SQL Server solution. Given that it can cost 5X
more, does Oracle RAC provide more than 5X of better performance, scalability, and highavailability than SQL Server?
We believe the answer is no, and customers should be looking at SQL Server solutions
instead. Oracle customers seem to agree and understand as Oracle RAC customers make up a
very small percentage of the entire Oracle install base (< 5%). Very few customers have
deployed Oracle RAC in production because the cost and complexity of Oracle RAC
deployment, management, and troubleshooting simply outweigh the benefits. In fact, in some
cases, customers who have implemented or evaluated Oracle RAC have since decided to
switch to SQL Server:
City of Virginia Beach: Based on our experience with Oracle RAC, we knew that a
Microsoft high-availability solution would be much easier to implement, simpler to
support, and less expensive. The licensing cost for SQL Server 2012 for our particular
configuration is about $120,000 less than for an Oracle RAC solution. - Elena Balitsky,
Team Leader, Database Administration Group
Carter Holt Harvey: Building manufacturer chose SQL Server after looking at Oracle
RAC on Linux, Oracle RAC on Unix, and SQL Server on Windows. SQL Server on
Windows has proven to be highly cost effective compared with our previous system
Chris Lowe, Architect
Powerco: When we first set up Oracle we configured Oracle RAC to support
active/active clusters, high availability and automatic failover. However, Microsoft SQL
Server has many of the same features and we can get the same redundancy from SQL
Server as we can from Oracle. Weve saved a significant amount of money, almost
$390,000 per annum, in migrating from Oracle to SQL Server. Weve been able to save
on rack space, reduce hardware, maintenance and licensing costs and have created
numerous efficiencies through simplifying the server environment Huw Griffiths,
Infrastructure Manager
This result shows that most customers do understand that the cost and complexity of Oracle
RAC far outweigh the benefits that Oracle claims to provide. Customers who are currently
evaluating Oracle RAC understand the risk of using a database technology that is complex and
expensive. These customers should also look at the high value solutions that Microsoft provides
to address their requirements. In fact, in some cases, customers who have implemented or
evaluated Oracle RAC have since decided to switch to SQL Server:
City of Virginia Beach: The City of Virginia Beach decided to deploy a solution based on
Microsoft SQL Server 2012 data management software. Microsoft technologies offer
maximum flexibility, easy management, and an integrated, user-friendly environment,
says Elena Balitsky, Team Leader, Database Administration Group. With Microsoft, we
can also get all the same functionality offered by other vendors at an unbeatable price.
Carter Holt Harvey: Carter Holt Harvey undertook an in-depth analysis to determine
which solution would have the best strategic fit within the business. Solutions
investigated included Oracle on Windows, Oracle RAC on Linux, Oracle RAC on Unix
and SQL Server on Windows. Building manufacturer chose SQL Server after looking at
Oracle RAC on Linux, Oracle RAC on Unix, and SQL Server on Windows. SAP, running
on Microsoft SQL Server Database Management System, and Microsoft Windows
Server 2008 proved to be the best strategic fit for the company. We chose the Microsoft
high availability data platform as this was the best strategic fit for the company, allowing
us to leverage commodity hardware, provide scalable and extensible infrastructure to
accommodate business growth, and deploy system upgrades and enhancements in the
future. SQL Server on Windows has proven to be highly cost effective compared with
our previous system, says Chris Lowe, Team Leader, Solutions Architects.
Powerco: Powerco is New Zealand's second largest electricity and gas distribution
company. Powerco had previously maintained both Oracle RAC and Microsoft SQL
Server platforms, which meant the business incurred the expense of supporting,
operating and maintaining two systems. Powerco sought to consolidate to a single
server platform to help simplify its IT environment, and identified SQL Server as the most
cost-effective and manageable solution. With the help of Microsoft Gold Partner, SQL
Services Ltd, Powerco has commenced migration to SQL Server. The consolidation has
enabled Powerco to eliminate significant costs, making it easier to manage and maintain
systems in-house, without the need to invest in external consultants. The migration to
SQL Server has helped Powerco to streamline its IT systems and cut total cost of
ownership by $390,000 a year. When we first set up Oracle we configured Oracle RAC
to support active/active clusters, high availability and automatic failover. However,
Microsoft SQL Server has many of the same features and we can get the same
redundancy from SQL Server as we can from Oracle. The Oracle platform was more
expensive to license, maintain and support, particularly because of the specialized
knowledge it required. It was clear that migrating to SQL Server would save money.
Weve saved a significant amount of money, almost $390,000 per annum, in migrating
from Oracle to SQL Server. Weve been able to save on rack space, reduce hardware,
SQL Server
Oracle RAC
Solution
Solution
Core Database
USD$115K
USD$380K
HA option
Included
USD$184K
Total
USD$115K
USD$564K
Note: The cost of the Oracle solution will be considerably higher if we factor in QA
and DR environment where Oracle recommends Active Data Guard
(additional USD$10K per processor) and an exact replica of Oracle RAC.
According to analyst firm IDC, SQL Server is an enterprise-level database platform and
is more competitive with other platforms. As an example, SQL Server 2012 includes
AlwaysOn providing high availability, disaster recovery, and active secondaries
(Active/Active).
According to real-life customers study from Alinean, it takes fewer database
administrators to manage mission-critical SQL Server databases compared with Oracle
databases. The study concluded that Total Cost of Administration (TCA) for SQL Server
databases is much lower (~5X) than Oracle databases.
According to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and analyst firm
ITIC, SQL Server has the lowest number of security vulnerabilities among major
database vendors (Oracle, IBM DB2, MySQL) in the last 10 years.
Finally, SQL Server 2012 Enterprise Edition provides more advanced functionality outof-the-box, without the need to buy additional options or separate products compared to
Oracle in the area of high availability, disaster recovery, advanced security, data
warehousing, advanced compression, manageability, non-relational data, advanced
business intelligence, master data management, data quality, and complex event
processing.
In the following sections we will examine common scenarios for database solutions, outline the
main reasons Oracle RAC is not suitable for these scenarios causing few customers to deploy,
and provide the best SQL Server solution.
High-Availability (HA)
In this section we will examine the scenario of high-availability (HA). Usually this scenario
involves having redundant computers or nodes which are then used to provide the database
service when one of the computers or nodes fails. Usually the HA system detects hardware or
software faults and immediately transfers all the service to the standby server without
administrative intervention, a process known as failover.
10
11
13
15
Conclusion
Oracle RAC and its predecessor Oracle Parallel Server (OPS) have been around for about 20
years since the first release of OPS in 1992. Oracle RAC is a complex and archaic architecture
that might not be suitable for customers, especially in the cloud computing era. Microsoft has a
strong vision and offerings to usher customers to the full benefits of next generation cloud
computing paradigm. In fact, Microsoft SQL Server offers database solution to meet customers
requirements with lower TCO than Oracle RAC in terms of initial implementation cost and
ongoing maintenance. In some cases, customers who have implemented or evaluated Oracle
RAC have since decided to switch to SQL Server.
For more information:
SQL Server Web site http://www.microsoft.com/sqlserver/en/us/default.aspx
SQL Azure Federation Web site http://msdn.microsoft.com/enus/library/windowsazure/hh597452.aspx
16
17