IBM Websphere vs Oracle Application Server

We are currently running ERP 8.0 on iSeries with Citrix.
We will be looking to upgrade to 8.12 in 2008.
I wanted to get some feed back on the pros/cons of the WAS and OAS.
Specifically...
1. How does WAS perform on the iSeries running 8.11/8.12?
2. Would it be better to run the web service (WAS or OAS) on a separate server?
3. What about the html server? Should it run on a separate server or on the same server as jas?
4. Would you recommend WAS or OAS? Keep in mind that we are a solid iSeries shop but have no prior web service expertise.
Thanks in advance for your responses!

One major complaint about OAS that I've heard from customers is the lack of available support for it. I've also heard that WAS performance is better than OAS too, although I've never experimented with comparing them myself.

I'm under impression OAS is times faster. Again, I did not formally measure anything, but it certainly feels this way...

hmm..... I'm wagering on Websphere. I think it's faster - especially with compression and caching which is all built in since it uses the Apache 2.X engine where as OAS is still on the antiquated 1.3.X engine.

Let the Holy wars begin........(again)

Anyone reminiscing on the great 'W' versus non 'W' environments for WTS as of late 2002?

;-) This should be more scientific than that - someone should measure something to compare...

Oracle has a vested interest in measuring this, but to provide the measurements may possibly harm their relationship with IBM.

From what I've been told, the JDE team has measured several times, and its about a wash. It depends on what they measure, and in some cases WAS uses more more memory but less CPU than OAS, and in other cases OAS uses less CPU but more memory than WAS.

I heard a rumor that they've gone to IBM to show them certain results, mostly on the time to bring up an OAS instance versus IBM instance, and have used that as ammunition to get IBM to either put up or shut up. I read that to mean its only a matter of time before the serious push to penetrate more customers with OAS is at hand.

All in all, I think the smart money is on OAS unless you can't live without your iSeries running OS/400.

Too many variables...if anyone hasn't said that yet. You have a 6 million dollar iSeries with full processor and memory...might tell you something completely different if you are a 10 user shop running intel and windows.

What's your current platform, number of users, modules running, experience level on platforms and application server software, budget, time to upgrade, future plans....etc., etc., etc....

Hi List,

I have a quick question on OAS. Someone told me that OAS can only be install/support with 8.12. Is that true?

We are on 8.10 and we are thinking of test JAS on OAS since we are an Oracle shop.

Thanks

One interesting tidbit that came out of Collaborate last week was about the licensing of red vs blue stack. It actually came out of a discussion regarding XMLpublisher. Although XML publisher is delivered with either stack, to legally use it, you have to be licensed for Red Stack..When I asked about it they stated that it was an 'Oracle Technology' so it only 'made sense' that it was only licensed with red stack. I then asked if future technologies would only be licensed with Red Stack, and he just smiled..but said that even if you are running blue stack, you can get an upgrade license which would then allow you to run Red stack as well..

My take on this is that although Oracle will (legally/technically) support all technologies, you will have to license their stack to use XMLpublisher and future technologies. In fact, a question came up regarding Fusion (the app not middleware) and if it supported other databases other than Oracle, the response was that they support 'open standards' and unfortunately, only the Oracle database supported these standards, thus, at the time, only their database is supported with the Fusion they are developing..but there was 'nothing preventing' competing databases to adopt the standards...

Thought that was just about the most enlightening info of the conference and gives very good foreshadowing of the future direction of Oracle and their licensing, etc..

Where I am going with this is, know the above and I were a client just in the decision mode between stacks (web servers, databases), it would certainly sway me towards Oracle App Server and the red stack...

Just my .02, and not worth any more than someone else's .02..

-John

It depends on your Tool Release, I beleive if you are on 8.96G1 or H1( not sure) and 8.10 it is supported.

adri_valentim <[email protected]> wrote: Hi List,

I have a quick question on OAS. Someone told me that OAS can only be install/support with 8.12. Is that

[ QUOTE ]
Where I am going with this is, know the above and I were a client just in the decision mode between stacks (web servers, databases), it would certainly sway me towards Oracle App Server and the red stack...

[/ QUOTE ]

John, I think your hunch is correct. I have heard from other reliable sources that Oracle is leaning in that direction as well. Can't say I'd blame them, that just makes good business sense. Maybe their next buying binge will get them into Operating Systems and Hardware so they can control the entire user experience.......

You will have to rip the Blue stack away from my cold dead hands.

Long live IBM the creator of the Structured Query Language. Without them where would you all be? Certainly there would be no Oracle DB!

Please say no to Uncle Larry and support your blue brethren.

(okay I am an IBM Partner and have 12 live 811/812 on WAS and 1 live on OAS)

I'm actually puching Red Stack since the Portal is way better.

If you're going to compare the stacks then you need to look at the entire stack and not just the J2EE Application Server. In terms of J2EE I prefer IBM, for Portal's OPS beats WPS hands down. As for the database.......is there anyone in the world that actually thinks DB2 UDB for LUW is better than Orcale 10g? Likely not. Score - Oracle 2, IBM 1.

[ QUOTE ]
....if it supported other databases other than Oracle, the response was that they support 'open standards' and unfortunately, only the Oracle database supported these standards, thus, at the time, only their database is supported with the Fusion they are developing..but there was 'nothing preventing' competing databases to adopt the standards...


[/ QUOTE ]

Brilliant. They just squashed their "Open and Standards Based" mantra themselves - in what, 4 days ?

If they write a standard, it isn't "open". It isn't a standard unless someone else picks it up and uses it. Lets look at the definition :

[ QUOTE ]

stand·ard
–noun
1. something considered by an authority or by general consent as a basis of comparison; an approved model.


[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

From what I've been told, the JDE team has measured several times, and its about a wash. It depends on what they measure, and in some cases WAS uses more more memory but less CPU than OAS, and in other cases OAS uses less CPU but more memory than WAS.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah right. Of course they haven't published any testing results in the past 4 years - so who knows how they're measuring anything. More than likely they've gone back to stress testing the database model only - as they have done several times in the past.

Anyhows. I'd agree it would be pretty much a "wash" since its more likely that the performance issue would be related to how the oneworld code is written, rather than how fast the screen can paint itself. For that, it used to be the fact that if you used Blackdown JDK instead of the sun JDK you'd see a performance increase - I'd say that might still be true. Use a faster JDK and your performance would improve, however the sun JDK has been re-written so many times since my linux tests back in 2002/2003, that its probably not going to be any better any more.

Of course, if you use an OS that can be "tailored" around Java - such as a compiled linux kernel - then you'll likely see a performance increase on that side as well in comparison to running Windows for example. Again, however, win2K3 is a lot better at running java than win2k was - so it might be a wash there too.

Last but not least is the network performance.

That still sucks no matter what app server you use.

Thanks, that is what I thought.

Hi,

1. Depends on the hardware you're using and the level of
expertise you have on OS/400 and WAS OS/400 intricacies.
WAS on the AS/400 is definitely not for beginners.

2. Definitely. WAS/OAS are CPU and RAM voracious, they
should better be left on a separate box, or on a
separate LPAR partition with RAM and CPU for their own.
On the other hand, it's a serious security breach to
leave your Web frontend on the same box where you store
your data : whoever enters your Web Server will have
immediate access to your tables!

3. You can keep it on the same box, HTTP Server takes
far less resources than WAS/OAS.

4. First of all, I would recommend you to get that
missing Web expertise (either internally or externally).
You're gonna need it! Then, you can decide if you prefer
whether OAS or WAS.

Just to clarify this issue. XML publisher is free if you have Red Stack. It can be licensed with Blue Stack..... so free with Red Stack...., pay if you want it with blue stack.