Oracle SuperCluster Reviews

We are using SuperCluster with logical domains and zone environments. The virtual machines are configured within these environments, and there are physical and logical partitions supporting several virtual machines. We rely on this setup for virtualization.

Workloads, such as any application, including ERP, FlexCube, and other Oracle products, perform very well on Oracle SuperClusters. This is due to the integration of Exadata for Oracle databases and high-performing components within the zoning environment at the application layer, making SuperClusters highly efficient and effective.

It is easy to integrate Supercluster into IT workflow. It has a forty-gigabit InfiniBand switch. It also includes Exadata and a very powerful M-series machine. These are not mainframe processors but provide excellent internal communication and scalability. All of these features contribute significantly to its performance.

It would be more convenient if the Agta Logic worked within the SuperCluster with the Agta data, as it may boost the speed of the applications.

I have been using Oracle SuperCluster for seven years.

The solution is stable. I rate it an eight out of ten.

Scalability depends on the workload because SuperCluster is available in three models: small, medium, and high-end configurations. The high-end configuration is suitable for very large organizations. However, scalability is limited by the initial configuration. You can upgrade to medium or high configurations if starting with a small configuration. Expanding with a high-end configuration requires adding a new rack or configuring a new SuperCluster instance and integrating it with the existing setup.

Approximately three thousand or more users can simultaneously access the SuperCluster.

SuperCluster is designed to handle data efficiently, offering unparalleled performance. No other workload can compete with Agilent data in terms of performance. SuperCluster is an engineered machine. While VxRail can somewhat compete with SuperCluster, it does not fully match its capabilities.

The initial setup is very complex. Even Oracle itself acknowledges the complexity involved in configuring such a supercomputer machine.

The pricing is low as per performance but high as per synchronization. They justify the price.

I rate the product’s pricing a four or five out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.

Everything in the Oracle SuperCluster is in cluster mode, and every component has a backup. This means that each component is redundantly backed up within the SuperCluster.

I recommend the solution but unfortunately, it is not available in the market now. Oracle has discontinued it for auditing.

Overall, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

In my organization there has always been a need for high-performance computing, and we decided to go with Oracle SuperCluster for this reason coupled with the fact that we already use Oracle products such as Solaris (11.4), which is itself a component of SuperCluster.

As far as performance is concerned, SuperCluster is a system of machines engineered for high performance and reliability, while supporting a number of modern enterprise storage and database technologies such as Exadata and ZFS. The memory, along with Oracle's M7 servers, is also very good in terms of performance. 

We use SuperCluster on-premises, with about 3,000 people who access it on a daily basis. Essentially, whoever is accessing the applications we use, is also accessing the SuperCluster. That includes our database administrators, system administrators, and many other administrators of various kinds.

Because SuperCluster is a specially engineered system, we have confidence in that all the components are compatible with one another. Everything runs together as a well-coupled group of machines, and the performance is great (especially the memory).

Speaking from a business perspective, our main problem is that our particular edition of SuperCluster is now at end-of-life status, making it obsolete and impossible to get support for. This presents a challenge for us, as finding a path to our next solution is not easy.

When it comes to features, I know that Oracle has already done a lot on the software side of things, but everyone has their own wish list for their specific environment and in newer editions of SuperCluster I would like to see new EXAchk data in the cloud environment. In fact, I would prefer if SuperCluster could come with more functionality as seen in Oracle Cloud where it is easier to share data and other things across the board. SuperCluster is already a smart machine, so I understand that it might be difficult to implement all those features, but at a minimum I would appreciate Oracle including more cloud infrastructure functionality. 

Oracle's existing cloud machines are already able to provide all these cloud features that I would like, including the use of containers and hardware-sharing, and it would be great to have these on board for their customers and end-users of SuperCluster.

I've been using Oracle SuperCluster since 2017.

In my experience, it has been stable.

It is a scalable system when it comes to performance, but unfortunately Oracle is no longer supporting the edition that we are running as it is now end-of-life, and figuring out the way forward isn't easy.

Our total user count is around 3,000 end-users, including everyone who uses our organization's applications such as normal end-users and the many administrators who work on it.

We use Oracle as our single source of support most of the time whenever we need to patch the system, because this is usually done by Oracle as a matter of course.

Their support is very good, not only when it comes to their direct help in patching our systems, but also in general. They are a helpful team of people and passionate about their work.

Positive

The setup and configuration is difficult for the end-user because almost all of the time, Oracle supports the system themselves. They perform the configuration of the SuperCluster and set up the machines, and normally they do the patches as well.

For us, the licensing costs are a large amount, but we are also paying for the rack, the SLA, and other extras. When I look into our organization's requirements regarding performance, machine load, etc., I believe that, while expensive, SuperCluster is nevertheless good for us.

Additionally, in our case, it doesn't seem to make a difference in cost whether you pay a monthly amount or go with some other arrangement. 

On the whole, SuperCluster is a smart, sophisticated machine, and when I look into the performance of it, I'm happy. However, in some cases, the system itself is somewhat larger than necessary for our environment, and can be considered underutilized when we only have minimal amounts of data to process.

I would rate Oracle SuperCluster a seven out of ten.

We use SuperCluster for the bank's financial application, which covers the core banking and internet banking functionality.

The core banking application and database is completely based on Oracle solutions, which provides us with not only good performance, but also the scalability we need to ensure the growth of the bank. We have not experienced many challenges in terms of meeting our performance requirements.

SuperCluster is basically a combination of Oracle, with Exadata and Compute node features, so it is a computing cluster that is integrated in a single infrastructure such that we don't need a separate solution for the application database, the data storage database, and everything else the application needs.

A major issue for us is that after the most recent update of SuperCluster, they have now stopped all future production of new versions. That is to say, after M7 there was M8, and now there are no future versions planned (e.g. M9) in the market.

As for features, even though they are not planning new releases, I believe SuperCluster could do better with their administration GUI. At the moment, most of our administration takes place on the command-line because the GUI is inadequate, so an improved GUI would suit us well.

I've been using Oracle SuperCluster for almost six years now.

There are no problems with stability.

It is scalable, but as mentioned, if you want to update your SuperCluster to the next version, you are out of luck as there will be no future development on it from Oracle.

As it is now, both the banking application and a few other applications are running fine for our users on SuperCluster. 

Their support is good. I would give them 8/10.

Positive

At this time, we also have other solutions available to us, but our experience is that the SuperCluster solution is superior.

The setup depends on the design. With SuperCluster, what you're setting up is less straightforward than most deployments because there are more virtualization areas to deal with. There are a lot of activities that need to be carried out in order to set it up properly. 

It was initially set up by the vendor itself, but going forward, any extra requirements are handled by myself as a consultant and the appropriate team. As for updates and maintenance, all this is done by us on a yearly basis.  

Due to the multiple products involved in our use of SuperCluster (including different software, hardware, etc.), I cannot comment on the licensing aspect.

When you look at SuperCluster's complete infrastructure as a whole and the fact that we can run the database and application all on the same infrastructure, I feel that SuperCluster is a better solution than most. It has good performance and works well for us.

Given that they have stopped upgrading and supporting SuperCluster, I am hoping that Oracle will be able to provide a similar type of solution with the same integrated infrastructure but with better performance in the future. I know there is a solution called PCA (Private Cloud Appliance), but this doesn't have the Exadata functionality that we need.

I would rate Oracle SuperCluster an eight out of ten.

We use it for our main Oracle Databases, which are for our business applications.

The two features that I find to be the most valuable are high availability and high performance.

We are not using the latest version. Our version is a bit old. It's not the latest generation.

They may have made some improvements but based on the version that I am using, it is a little complicated because it is based on the Unix Operating system.

My understanding is that now it is on the Linux Operating System because it is simple to use and more user-friendly. 

The SuperCluster is based on Solaris, which is different than Linux.

They should keep using the Linux Operating System. It's better than Unix. It's easier, more flexible, and used in most of the machines in the world.

Unix is not as easy for the users, it needs more maintenance and costs extra.

In my opinion, the next generation will be Linux-based.

I have been using this solution for the last 12 months.

We are using version seven.

It's a stable product, it's been running for months.

We cannot survive without Oracle's support. You are in an Oracle box made by Oracle, that can only be fixed by Oracle.

You don't have the freedom to go outside of Oracle's control.

The technical support is good. For both hardware and software, it's very good.

I was not a part of the installation in this company. When I arrived, it was already installed.

I found that the installation was not done in the way that I think was the best model.

SuperCluster usually comes with Oracle Virtualization and you can create virtual machines as you do in virtualization solutions.

They completed the installation with a hard partitioning solution with physical nodes. They used a lot of physical nodes and didn't take the opportunity to use Oracle virtualization.

It may have been a requirement of the company.

It's a really good product.

At this time, we are still using it and there are no plans to change it that I am aware of.

It depends on the plans of the company and what they want to do in the next three to five years.

I would rate Oracle SuperCluster a seven out of ten.

In a three-node cluster or a two-node cluster scenario, if one node experiences an outage, the remaining nodes ensure the continuity of the application. However, in the case of a general database setup where only one server is used, any outage on that particular server would lead to application downtime, preventing users from accessing their environment. The advantage of an Oracle SuperCluster environment becomes evident in such situations, as even if one node is down, the rest of the nodes remain available. 

Another significant advantage of using the product is improved performance through load balancing. In this setup, the traffic is distributed among the nodes, enhancing the overall performance compared to a scenario where all traffic is directed to a single server.

We have faced network connectivity issues. 

P1 incidents get resolved in an hour. 

The tool's deployment is easy. 

I rate the product an eight out of ten. 

Our HR system uses this solution as do many of our staff. We currently have over 3,000 users within the company and the company has a total of 15,000 employees. We have a vendor that carries out the majority of our maintenance and one or two internal people also involved in maintenance. The solution is used on a daily basis in the company. We're customers of Oracle and I'm a service support specialist. 

The scalability and the technical support that you get from Oracle are very valuable to us. 

The solution is not very user friendly and that could be improved. 

I've been using this solution for five years. 

In terms of stability, the hardware of the solution is stable but on the software level we've had some problems. They deal with any issues very quickly. 

The initial setup was quite complex and we used a system integrator to implement. I believe deployment took about three months. We've been using the solution for about five years and we're now planning a hardware update. 

We pay an annual licensing fee but that's not my department. 

It's important to realize that this is a big system for enterprise companies and not suitable for small business.

I would rate this product an eight out of 10. 

Our primary use case is for E-Business Suite applications, the applications for the government, and most of the applications that use an HCM.

I wouldn't say there is anything good about it because since it was deployed we have been having issues with the cluster.

It's not working as we expected. We thought it would be fast and reliable but we are not getting the reliability. It's not stable. It could be an issue with the network or configuration. 

I have been using SuperCluster for just over a year. 

It's partially scalable. We have less than 20 users using this solution.

Their support is 50/50. Neither good nor bad. 

We previously used IBM. We decided to switch because of our implementers. 

The setup was complex. 

We've also changed the network to Cisco. Maybe it's a problem with the compatibility. 

It took around six months to set up.

We used a consultant for the deployment. All of the maintenance is done by Oracle. 

It is very expensive. 

My advice to someone considering this solution is to do your homework before switching to this solution. Look at what the solution offers, look at the licensing because we might think that doing the Oracle SuperCluster would actually reduce the licensing. It is not like that. 

The staff should also know what kind of issues to expect so as to be able to actually work with them to be able to work with the SuperCluster. The staff should be trained to identify issues. 

I would rate SuperCluster a six out of ten. 

Regarding the performance between our old system and the new system, previously we were running the system with IBM, the quarterbacking was running in IBM, then we moved to the Oracle SuperCluster. 

The quarterbacking is from Oracle, the hardware and the database is also running on Oracle. 

We have seen that there is an improvement in performance. For example, end of the year in IBM, we were running almost twelve and a half hours, but when we moved to Oracle SuperCluster, after the first year it was running for only four hours. It went from twelve and a half hours to four hours.

The performance is significantly improved, and the administration is easy because it is a single platform end-to-end.

The features of Oracle SuperCluster are more common based. If you want to make any additional configuration or changes to the virtualization layer, it is commonly based.

We are not able to upgrade our SuperClass to the latest version, because this solution is more compatible with Oracle. We are not able to run any .NET-based applications and they cannot install Windows. 

The Oracle SuperCluster is specific to Oracle products. They can set up a convergence infrastructure so that you can run both applications, such as Java, non-Java, .NET, and Windows.

The features are limited and we are not able to upgrade this solution. We are not able to integrate our current version with the new, upgraded version.

If they had an application that centralized the administration, not about the monitoring, but for the configuration, it would be better.

We have heard that after the M8 was introduced a couple of years ago, there will be no production.

This solution is stable.

This solution is scalable and performs well.

We can expand to our requirements because the storage can be expanded and also the computer with us can be expanded. It depends upon the free space available on the rack.

We can expand the rack to superclass a rack and populate what the requirements are regarding the compute, the storage, and we can connect between the two racks using the InfiniBand switches.

The technical support is the best with any hardware issues.

Previously we used X-Beta. Oracle created a specific product database and not the applications. As Oracle SuperCluster, we can run applications and databases in a single infrastructure.

The deployment model was on-premises.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Our primary use case is as a converged infrastructure for the core database.

It has encouraged a simple and systematic capacity upgrade.

A valuable feature is the Exadata Storage appliance, optimized for database queries.

I would like to see control domain and zone management via a management console, similar to that of OVM.

Primary use case was a combination of a hardware refresh/consolidation of aging Sun M5000 equipment onto a half rack T5-8 SuperCluster. One of the core business drivers was the reduction of operational costs, while improving performance and (perceived) stability of the platforms.

The promise of consolidation is still a strong selling point, especially if the prospective client has applications that run on SPARC and has its data store in an Oracle Database.

There are many areas for improvement. For example, better guidance in terms of troubleshooting issues relating to ZFS, as well as better tools/diagnostics for monitoring that specific component, to better identify potential issues. Hardware monitoring via OEM 13.2 is not 100 percent, as Ops Center is still required in some instances.

There was an issue with zones rebooting due to a CRS bug (Version 12.1.0.2 at the time) which took Oracle support quite a few weeks to eventually identify.

While the general consensus was to maintain about 10 percent free space on ZFS file systems, it became clear that 30 percent free was actually required in order to maintain acceptable performance. Having to keep that headroom available impacted scalability to some extent.

As with Oracle Support in general, it depends on the engineer picking up the call. Some issues were resolved quickly and with detailed information, while others often dragged and went around in circles.

Previous solution was M5000-based and the switch was from a consolidation/hardware refresh point of view.

Initial setup had to be redone as there was some miscommunication and/or misunderstanding of requirements.

Unfortunately, I have not had the best experience with Oracle’s SuperCluster. Zones were rebooting at random due to Clusterware bugs, there were various ZFS issues resulting in performance decreases and node evictions and, I’m sad to say, we did not receive the strongest vendor support in resolving the issues.

Do due diligence on sizing and whether or not the solution is, in fact, fit for purpose.