radi8
Well Known Member
What are the PROS and CONS of OAS vs WAS? We are currently on WAS and am wondering if it is worth considering changing to OAS.
gregglarkin
Legendary Poster
I see in your signiture that you are a SQL 2000 shop. Don't bother with OAS until you are up to SQL 2005 or SQL 2008. Oracle doesn't support SQL 2000, and getting the datasources working with OAS is one of the tricky parts. Since they don't support SQL 2000, they won't help you past that point. I tried to set up OAS with XE, what a trainwreck. After many fits and stops, we killed the project. You will have better luck with a later release than I had with XE. We are using OAS for our 8.12 and 9.0 systems. For our XE systems that have web servers, we are sticking with WAS.
- Gregg
- Gregg
Malcolm
Active Member
That said we are on 8.10 and we are using OAS over SQL2000 and it works a treat, better than WAS did! The trick is to use the SQL2005 JDBC and the Native Client ODBC drivers and configure OAS like you are on SQL2005, they give a performance boost over the SQL2000 stuff anyway
radi8
Well Known Member
We are currently in the process of upgrading to SQL 2008 and also getting all of our servers OS upgraded as well. We tend to lag behind on OS upgrades.
With regards to performance, is there any difference in WAS vs OAS? I know that for future functionality enhancements, i.e. BI, etc... that OAS is required. Can you elaborate more on the benefits and also pitfalls?
Thanks in advance.
With regards to performance, is there any difference in WAS vs OAS? I know that for future functionality enhancements, i.e. BI, etc... that OAS is required. Can you elaborate more on the benefits and also pitfalls?
Thanks in advance.
altquark
Legendary Poster
First of all, why anyone non-as400 would consider anything other than OAS is beyond me unless they have a specific WAS strategy already. Oracle owns JDE. They own OAS. They own Weblogic. Seems they're obviously going to "make it worthwhile" for you to use their products.
Yes, OAS seems to me, given the same exact hardware, to be slightly better performing over WAS. However, that is not scientific, and until someone or something (oracle) provide actual benchmarks for JDE, its all supposition.
However, OAS is FAR easier to implement and manage compared to WAS. That can easily equate to a bottom-line benefit based on the time troubleshooting Websphere code.
Of course, I haven't dealt with the very latest versions of websphere - because all the customers I've worked with in the past 2 years have all been OAS customers - so again, I cannot provide anything but hearsay and conjuncture...
When the newer versions of OAS are supported with the Weblogic engine, my guess is that OAS will not only blow everything out of the water in performance, scalability and manageability, but it will likely force JDE down an "OAS Only" path. Certainly its worth it to be platform independent when it comes to hardware and/or database - but why be platform independent over Java Application Server ? JDE has always preferred one over another throughout its history, now its the turn to prefer its "half-sister"
Yes, OAS seems to me, given the same exact hardware, to be slightly better performing over WAS. However, that is not scientific, and until someone or something (oracle) provide actual benchmarks for JDE, its all supposition.
However, OAS is FAR easier to implement and manage compared to WAS. That can easily equate to a bottom-line benefit based on the time troubleshooting Websphere code.
Of course, I haven't dealt with the very latest versions of websphere - because all the customers I've worked with in the past 2 years have all been OAS customers - so again, I cannot provide anything but hearsay and conjuncture...
When the newer versions of OAS are supported with the Weblogic engine, my guess is that OAS will not only blow everything out of the water in performance, scalability and manageability, but it will likely force JDE down an "OAS Only" path. Certainly its worth it to be platform independent when it comes to hardware and/or database - but why be platform independent over Java Application Server ? JDE has always preferred one over another throughout its history, now its the turn to prefer its "half-sister"
cdawes
VIP Member
WAS has a longer history than OAS with JDE so this is mostly legacy.
Both products work equally poorly un-tuned and equally fast when tuned.
Yes OAS is easier to install than WAS for the novice but any consultant worth their weight in salt can do either in the same amount of time.
When it comes to management of WAS vs. OAS .....what management? JDE doesn't even use 5% of the J2EE stack so it's pretty much not using anything. Not using anything means you don't have to manage anything. Consider it like Citrix once it's up and running if you did it properly you don't need to touch it after that.
I've done 15 E1 8.12 projects - 75% were WAS and 25% were OAS. Why so many WAS do you ask if the name on the door says "Oracle".
Very simple it has to do with licensing. In general Red Stack is NOT available to customers licensed on an Enterprise agreement so those on a Enterprise agreement are given Blue Stack. Red stack is only available to those on a named or concurrent user license agreement.
.......and of course the gotcha is that named/concurrent agreements cost more than Enterprise agreements.
Now that BI Publisher is available with Blue or Red stack (as of a few months ago because Crystal is no longer offered) there is more of a level playing field between the 2 stacks.
So the reasons why someone would choose WAS are pretty clear:
(1) Longer history with JDE
(2) More customers on WAS than OAS
(3) Cheaper for most customers
There are of course just as many reasons to go with OAS but we've all seen those before.
I'm not voting in favour of either or preaching the mantra that "you're crazy to go WAS or OAS". Each situation is uniquely different.
As for JDE going OAS only...........geez I guess if ya follow that lgoic then in a few years JDE will only run on OAS with an Oracle Database all on Oracle Linux VM's on top of Solaris hardware?
Also isn't the whole point of Java to be open, flexible and platform independent? Makes real sense then to just support OAS - even it does run on a few platforms.
Just trying to keep it real.
Colin
Both products work equally poorly un-tuned and equally fast when tuned.
Yes OAS is easier to install than WAS for the novice but any consultant worth their weight in salt can do either in the same amount of time.
When it comes to management of WAS vs. OAS .....what management? JDE doesn't even use 5% of the J2EE stack so it's pretty much not using anything. Not using anything means you don't have to manage anything. Consider it like Citrix once it's up and running if you did it properly you don't need to touch it after that.
I've done 15 E1 8.12 projects - 75% were WAS and 25% were OAS. Why so many WAS do you ask if the name on the door says "Oracle".
Very simple it has to do with licensing. In general Red Stack is NOT available to customers licensed on an Enterprise agreement so those on a Enterprise agreement are given Blue Stack. Red stack is only available to those on a named or concurrent user license agreement.
.......and of course the gotcha is that named/concurrent agreements cost more than Enterprise agreements.
Now that BI Publisher is available with Blue or Red stack (as of a few months ago because Crystal is no longer offered) there is more of a level playing field between the 2 stacks.
So the reasons why someone would choose WAS are pretty clear:
(1) Longer history with JDE
(2) More customers on WAS than OAS
(3) Cheaper for most customers
There are of course just as many reasons to go with OAS but we've all seen those before.
I'm not voting in favour of either or preaching the mantra that "you're crazy to go WAS or OAS". Each situation is uniquely different.
As for JDE going OAS only...........geez I guess if ya follow that lgoic then in a few years JDE will only run on OAS with an Oracle Database all on Oracle Linux VM's on top of Solaris hardware?
Also isn't the whole point of Java to be open, flexible and platform independent? Makes real sense then to just support OAS - even it does run on a few platforms.
Just trying to keep it real.
Colin
brother_of_karamazov
Legendary Poster
There are a large number of customers who signed long-term agreements with JD Edwards at very favorable terms compared to the current Oracle contracts. These contracts specify Blue stack and in order to keep the contract in place, they must use WAS.
It may have been beyond you but certainly an understandable reason to stay on WAS.
My personal opinion is that once Oracle turns into Apple and controls the hardware and all the software, companies that chose OAS for performance reasons are going to be less than happy that they are so dependent on a single vendor for their entire solution.
[ QUOTE ]
First of all, why anyone non-as400 would consider anything other than OAS is beyond me unless they have a specific WAS strategy already. Oracle owns JDE. They own OAS. They own Weblogic. Seems they're obviously going to "make it worthwhile" for you to use their products.
Yes, OAS seems to me, given the same exact hardware, to be slightly better performing over WAS. However, that is not scientific, and until someone or something (oracle) provide actual benchmarks for JDE, its all supposition.
However, OAS is FAR easier to implement and manage compared to WAS. That can easily equate to a bottom-line benefit based on the time troubleshooting Websphere code.
Of course, I haven't dealt with the very latest versions of websphere - because all the customers I've worked with in the past 2 years have all been OAS customers - so again, I cannot provide anything but hearsay and conjuncture...
When the newer versions of OAS are supported with the Weblogic engine, my guess is that OAS will not only blow everything out of the water in performance, scalability and manageability, but it will likely force JDE down an "OAS Only" path. Certainly its worth it to be platform independent when it comes to hardware and/or database - but why be platform independent over Java Application Server ? JDE has always preferred one over another throughout its history, now its the turn to prefer its "half-sister"
[/ QUOTE ]
It may have been beyond you but certainly an understandable reason to stay on WAS.
My personal opinion is that once Oracle turns into Apple and controls the hardware and all the software, companies that chose OAS for performance reasons are going to be less than happy that they are so dependent on a single vendor for their entire solution.
[ QUOTE ]
First of all, why anyone non-as400 would consider anything other than OAS is beyond me unless they have a specific WAS strategy already. Oracle owns JDE. They own OAS. They own Weblogic. Seems they're obviously going to "make it worthwhile" for you to use their products.
Yes, OAS seems to me, given the same exact hardware, to be slightly better performing over WAS. However, that is not scientific, and until someone or something (oracle) provide actual benchmarks for JDE, its all supposition.
However, OAS is FAR easier to implement and manage compared to WAS. That can easily equate to a bottom-line benefit based on the time troubleshooting Websphere code.
Of course, I haven't dealt with the very latest versions of websphere - because all the customers I've worked with in the past 2 years have all been OAS customers - so again, I cannot provide anything but hearsay and conjuncture...
When the newer versions of OAS are supported with the Weblogic engine, my guess is that OAS will not only blow everything out of the water in performance, scalability and manageability, but it will likely force JDE down an "OAS Only" path. Certainly its worth it to be platform independent when it comes to hardware and/or database - but why be platform independent over Java Application Server ? JDE has always preferred one over another throughout its history, now its the turn to prefer its "half-sister"
[/ QUOTE ]
altquark
Legendary Poster
I stated "those non-as400 who choose WAS over OAS if they do not currently have a strategic direction with WAS is beyond me" - ie, NEW customers who are not currently on a redstack or bluestack and are not specifically running on an AS/400 (ie, SQL or Oracle customers).
I agree that there is not enough impetus for a customer on bluestack currently to jump to redstack, but there are many Xe customers who haven't signed to a specific "stack" and who have the power to negotiate.
I also agree that it IS better to have competition in the marketplace - but I'm not sure that Oracle views it the same way.
I disagree that Oracle will become an "apple" - I really think that the Sun hardware platform will either be spun off or will be run as a separate, independent business unit. Oracle has a history of not running hardware companies very well.
I agree that there is not enough impetus for a customer on bluestack currently to jump to redstack, but there are many Xe customers who haven't signed to a specific "stack" and who have the power to negotiate.
I also agree that it IS better to have competition in the marketplace - but I'm not sure that Oracle views it the same way.
I disagree that Oracle will become an "apple" - I really think that the Sun hardware platform will either be spun off or will be run as a separate, independent business unit. Oracle has a history of not running hardware companies very well.
cdawes
VIP Member
"but there are many Xe customers who haven't signed to a specific "stack" and who have the power to negotiate."
It's simply financial. Those customers that currently do not own a tech stack have the following choices:
(1) No Tech Foundation - buy it yourself at twice the cost
(2) Enterprise Agreement --> Blue stack
(3) Named/Concurrent Agreement --> Red or Blue
Power to negotiate is nil unless you're 10 billion plus.
The Oracle Tech guys get compensated everytime Red Stack is sold. People like money (especially Sales Reps) so they won't let this go for free.
This whole licensing thing really is weird. Why not gie a full choice? So what do customers (new or old do?) --> blue stack, blue stack, blue stack until this silly thing is fixed.
Colin
It's simply financial. Those customers that currently do not own a tech stack have the following choices:
(1) No Tech Foundation - buy it yourself at twice the cost
(2) Enterprise Agreement --> Blue stack
(3) Named/Concurrent Agreement --> Red or Blue
Power to negotiate is nil unless you're 10 billion plus.
The Oracle Tech guys get compensated everytime Red Stack is sold. People like money (especially Sales Reps) so they won't let this go for free.
This whole licensing thing really is weird. Why not gie a full choice? So what do customers (new or old do?) --> blue stack, blue stack, blue stack until this silly thing is fixed.
Colin
gregglarkin
Legendary Poster
Colin,
I work at one of the companies in the "$10 billion dollar" club. We are currently a mixed bag of Red and Blue. When we came back on to Oracle support, we bought a gazillion seats for OAS. Our strategy is to impliment OAS when we upgrade instances from XE to 9.0. We are using OAS in production in Western Europe. Here in North America, we are using OAS as the foundation for our Fusion Middleware. I tried an upgrade from WAS to OAS for XE, that was a trainwreck, we left the North American web server on WAS. Over time, WAS will fade away as we move up to 9.0, but until then, it will remain our XE web server of choice.
In a previous post, someone mentioned that JDE only uses a small piece of the J2EE stack. That is VERY true. There is very little maintenance needed for supporting the web server once it is in place. Over in the Fusion world, that is a different story. The fusion middleware stack is in constant need of patching and maintenance. Luckily for me, that is handled by a different group. I dodged that bullet.
I'll throw one Pro vs Con argument out there. One of my gripes with WAS was that out of the box, it installed in "unprotected mode." It takes a bit of work to figure out how to lock it down. OAS comes locked down out of the box.
If a company does decide to switch stacks, I highly recommend getting a training class (or two) under your belt. I took both the basic and advanced OAS classes from Oracle U. One gripe with that. The classes were taught on linux machines. A lot of the exercises dealt with installation and configuration of OAS on Linux. I work in a windows shop, so working through the unfamiliar linux commands was a challenge, especially since much of the exercises were linux based steps. It would be nice if Oracle could create a version of the class based on the Windows platform.
- Gregg
I work at one of the companies in the "$10 billion dollar" club. We are currently a mixed bag of Red and Blue. When we came back on to Oracle support, we bought a gazillion seats for OAS. Our strategy is to impliment OAS when we upgrade instances from XE to 9.0. We are using OAS in production in Western Europe. Here in North America, we are using OAS as the foundation for our Fusion Middleware. I tried an upgrade from WAS to OAS for XE, that was a trainwreck, we left the North American web server on WAS. Over time, WAS will fade away as we move up to 9.0, but until then, it will remain our XE web server of choice.
In a previous post, someone mentioned that JDE only uses a small piece of the J2EE stack. That is VERY true. There is very little maintenance needed for supporting the web server once it is in place. Over in the Fusion world, that is a different story. The fusion middleware stack is in constant need of patching and maintenance. Luckily for me, that is handled by a different group. I dodged that bullet.
I'll throw one Pro vs Con argument out there. One of my gripes with WAS was that out of the box, it installed in "unprotected mode." It takes a bit of work to figure out how to lock it down. OAS comes locked down out of the box.
If a company does decide to switch stacks, I highly recommend getting a training class (or two) under your belt. I took both the basic and advanced OAS classes from Oracle U. One gripe with that. The classes were taught on linux machines. A lot of the exercises dealt with installation and configuration of OAS on Linux. I work in a windows shop, so working through the unfamiliar linux commands was a challenge, especially since much of the exercises were linux based steps. It would be nice if Oracle could create a version of the class based on the Windows platform.
- Gregg
altquark
Legendary Poster
....but Oracle is really wanting to push THEIR version of Linux (and Larry hates Microsoft).
Gregg is right though - WAS is very unprotected when initially installed (at least the earlier versions were) - whereas OAS is much more secure "out of the box". That supports my argument that OAS is easier to manage with the initial installation...
I am very surprised about the Enterprise License being "forced" to use the Blue Stack - why would Oracle "force" their largest JDE customers away from their own product line ? I didn't see this with my last customer at all (which was a 4,000 user account on the AS/400 and was looking to move to Oracle/Linux) - but I wasn't directly involved in the licensing question...
One thing however, the "stacks" only cover a certain % of what a company needs to purchase to be able to go live. As was mentioned before, if you're on red stack, OAS is ONLY provided for the EnterpriseOne web servers. It isn't provided for OBIEE or any other service. Not sure how much OAS costs for a license - it'd be interesting if someone knows the pricing comparison between WAS and OAS...!
Gregg is right though - WAS is very unprotected when initially installed (at least the earlier versions were) - whereas OAS is much more secure "out of the box". That supports my argument that OAS is easier to manage with the initial installation...
I am very surprised about the Enterprise License being "forced" to use the Blue Stack - why would Oracle "force" their largest JDE customers away from their own product line ? I didn't see this with my last customer at all (which was a 4,000 user account on the AS/400 and was looking to move to Oracle/Linux) - but I wasn't directly involved in the licensing question...
One thing however, the "stacks" only cover a certain % of what a company needs to purchase to be able to go live. As was mentioned before, if you're on red stack, OAS is ONLY provided for the EnterpriseOne web servers. It isn't provided for OBIEE or any other service. Not sure how much OAS costs for a license - it'd be interesting if someone knows the pricing comparison between WAS and OAS...!
gregglarkin
Legendary Poster
[ QUOTE ]
Gregg is right though - WAS is very unprotected when initially installed (at least the earlier versions were) - whereas OAS is much more secure "out of the box". That supports my argument that OAS is easier to manage with the initial installation...
[/ QUOTE ]
Of course I'm right! I'm a CNC god like you, remember?
WAS 4, 5, and 6 are all wide open out of the box. To make life even more of a challenge, if you have the network deployment version of WAS they ratchet the lockdown task even higher. Stupid design on IBM's side. I wrote a whitepaper describing the process of locking down websphere back in 2006. Subscribers to JDEtips.com can download the whitepaper, look for article titled "Oops, I've got a flaming hole in my security!"
[ QUOTE ]
Not sure how much OAS costs for a license - it'd be interesting if someone knows the pricing comparison between WAS and OAS...!
[/ QUOTE ]
I wish I could tell ya Jon, but here in the "$10 Billion" club, pricing negotiation goes on at the Sr. Director level.
- Gregg
Gregg is right though - WAS is very unprotected when initially installed (at least the earlier versions were) - whereas OAS is much more secure "out of the box". That supports my argument that OAS is easier to manage with the initial installation...
[/ QUOTE ]
Of course I'm right! I'm a CNC god like you, remember?
WAS 4, 5, and 6 are all wide open out of the box. To make life even more of a challenge, if you have the network deployment version of WAS they ratchet the lockdown task even higher. Stupid design on IBM's side. I wrote a whitepaper describing the process of locking down websphere back in 2006. Subscribers to JDEtips.com can download the whitepaper, look for article titled "Oops, I've got a flaming hole in my security!"
[ QUOTE ]
Not sure how much OAS costs for a license - it'd be interesting if someone knows the pricing comparison between WAS and OAS...!
[/ QUOTE ]
I wish I could tell ya Jon, but here in the "$10 Billion" club, pricing negotiation goes on at the Sr. Director level.
- Gregg
cdawes
VIP Member
Yep WAS is a 10,000 pound Gorilla that's a complete J2EE solution.
OAS is a 1,000 pound Gazille
WebLogic is a 9,000 Chimp
When Oracle takes OAS + WebLogic = OASLogic you get another 10,000 pound Gorilla.
Yes WAS security is not enabled by default which is really dumb. Configuring it takes a few goes but yuo eventually get it. You can also just keep 'server1' and the Dmgr off. Ya don't need it unless changing something.
I drink the same Kool-Aid as the rest of the OraSoftEdwards community. I'd love to see more OAS, Oracle DB and Oracle Portal - but only if it makes good technical and financial sense.
Colin
OAS is a 1,000 pound Gazille
WebLogic is a 9,000 Chimp
When Oracle takes OAS + WebLogic = OASLogic you get another 10,000 pound Gorilla.
Yes WAS security is not enabled by default which is really dumb. Configuring it takes a few goes but yuo eventually get it. You can also just keep 'server1' and the Dmgr off. Ya don't need it unless changing something.
I drink the same Kool-Aid as the rest of the OraSoftEdwards community. I'd love to see more OAS, Oracle DB and Oracle Portal - but only if it makes good technical and financial sense.
Colin
altquark
Legendary Poster
Well, for those who want to know, Oracle doesn't shy away from pricing at all. Took just a couple of google submissions - but I found this link :
http://www.oracle.com/corporate/pricing/pricelists.html
which is ALL of Oracles "list" pricing - including the entire JD Edwards suite pricing. I like that !
(According to this, the lowest price to become an EnterpriseOne customer is about $30,000 - which includes a 5 user license for Oracle Tech Foundation and Financials. The ongoing support cost would be about $6,275 per year. Not bad at all - certainly lower than any other product out there. But, I might not have calculated the pricing correctly...)
Anyhow - OAS according to this is $11,500 per CPU plus $230 per named user for the Standard Edition, and $35,000 per CPU and $700 per named user for the Enterprise Edition. Weblogic Enterprise Server is significantly less expensive.
The other, important factor is that Oracle does not differentiate how many cores a processor has - therefore, a Quad core Processor is counted as a single processor license...
IBM licenses by "PVU" - "Processor Value Unit" which DOES differentiate based on the number of cores. Websphere costs $46.25 per "PVU" - so a single processor, Quad Core is $9,250 for the standard editon.
All these are "list" prices - and usually a company can negotiate significant discounts depending on the manufacturer. Its likely that WAS and OAS can be negotiated down to the same price for the same system...
http://www.oracle.com/corporate/pricing/pricelists.html
which is ALL of Oracles "list" pricing - including the entire JD Edwards suite pricing. I like that !
(According to this, the lowest price to become an EnterpriseOne customer is about $30,000 - which includes a 5 user license for Oracle Tech Foundation and Financials. The ongoing support cost would be about $6,275 per year. Not bad at all - certainly lower than any other product out there. But, I might not have calculated the pricing correctly...)
Anyhow - OAS according to this is $11,500 per CPU plus $230 per named user for the Standard Edition, and $35,000 per CPU and $700 per named user for the Enterprise Edition. Weblogic Enterprise Server is significantly less expensive.
The other, important factor is that Oracle does not differentiate how many cores a processor has - therefore, a Quad core Processor is counted as a single processor license...
IBM licenses by "PVU" - "Processor Value Unit" which DOES differentiate based on the number of cores. Websphere costs $46.25 per "PVU" - so a single processor, Quad Core is $9,250 for the standard editon.
All these are "list" prices - and usually a company can negotiate significant discounts depending on the manufacturer. Its likely that WAS and OAS can be negotiated down to the same price for the same system...
jdel6654
VIP Member
Colin: Very well stated. I could not agree more.
OAS is a very nice, simple web app server just like all of the other Apache Tomcat clones (at least early on). It is easy to deploy and support. And, as OAS incorporates the other necessary (but ignored) features, it will appear just as bloated as IBM WAS.
IMHO, WebLogic has the features that OAS is missing. Its just a matter of time before JDE is supported again on WebLogic.
The great thing about it is that at least we have the choices.
FWIW, here is another thread on the topic.
Red Stack, Blue Stack, etc...
OAS is a very nice, simple web app server just like all of the other Apache Tomcat clones (at least early on). It is easy to deploy and support. And, as OAS incorporates the other necessary (but ignored) features, it will appear just as bloated as IBM WAS.
IMHO, WebLogic has the features that OAS is missing. Its just a matter of time before JDE is supported again on WebLogic.
The great thing about it is that at least we have the choices.
FWIW, here is another thread on the topic.
Red Stack, Blue Stack, etc...
Alex_Pastuhov
Legendary Poster
> I'd love to see more OAS, Oracle DB and [...]
It's off-topic, I just couldn't resist, plus there's really no other good topic for this bit of information: remember the Unicode discussions we had here? The consensus (started by Oracle) was that using Unicode data with Unicode JDE may speed things up, because there will be less conversions going on. Now, I have recently come up with an interesting observation: while Unicode in JDE is the same as in Windows - UTF-16LE, Oracle databases actually appear to store and manipulate all Unicode data (NCHAR & NVARCHAR2) in UTF-16BE (at least OCI does, it was clearly designed by an idiot), which effectively means that to update a string in a DB, the software will have to swap every two bytes around in the string twice - once for reading and once for writing. And because it is literally "by byte", you may have 256-bit OS and RDBMS (one day we'll have them), it will still be doing it byte-by-byte.
That's probably double-triple the CPU time it would use with MS SQL Server, which uses LE collation...
And on the topic at hand, I am all pro-OAS. I do believe it's snappier than WAS. And the installation is easier.
It's off-topic, I just couldn't resist, plus there's really no other good topic for this bit of information: remember the Unicode discussions we had here? The consensus (started by Oracle) was that using Unicode data with Unicode JDE may speed things up, because there will be less conversions going on. Now, I have recently come up with an interesting observation: while Unicode in JDE is the same as in Windows - UTF-16LE, Oracle databases actually appear to store and manipulate all Unicode data (NCHAR & NVARCHAR2) in UTF-16BE (at least OCI does, it was clearly designed by an idiot), which effectively means that to update a string in a DB, the software will have to swap every two bytes around in the string twice - once for reading and once for writing. And because it is literally "by byte", you may have 256-bit OS and RDBMS (one day we'll have them), it will still be doing it byte-by-byte.
That's probably double-triple the CPU time it would use with MS SQL Server, which uses LE collation...
And on the topic at hand, I am all pro-OAS. I do believe it's snappier than WAS. And the installation is easier.
Similar threads
- Patrickjk
- JD Edwards® EnterpriseOne Technical
