 |
 |
Archives of the TeradataForum
Message Posted: Wed, 07 Apr 2004 @ 17:03:54 GMT
| Subj: | | Re: TPC Website |
| |
| From: | | Anomy Anom |
<-- Anonymously Posted: Wednesday, April 07, 2004 11:31 -->
Anomy.Anom wrote:
| | "Teradata believes competing vendors have found new ways to cheat on TPC-H, such as designing in features specifically to give better
benchmark performance (but useless in the real world). Teradata fears they cannot maintain their leadership position without playing the same
game, and they don't have the resources to do that. So they decided to stress their long-standing complaints about the shortcomings of the
benchmark itself, and quit while they were ahead." | |
With the cost of licensing and the requirement for more memory when upgrading to R5.1, isn't it more likely that Teradata was going to
take a significant benchmarking loss against DB2?
I think that the following quote from the Forester Report deserves more attention than Teradata's excuse about the artificial nature of
benchmarking:
"Long the highest-powered - and highest-priced - player in large-scale data warehousing, the vendor leaves the field while it is 31% ahead of
the nearest competitor, IBM, in the composite power and throughput metric (QphH). Teradata is tied with IBM for price/performance at $243 and it
lags by 30.8% in the pure price category at the 10 TB volume point."
| |
