RE: Q. To RAC or go vertical

Stephen

I agree with your comments re scalability vs fault tolerance. Actually the configuration I am looking at is 16 CPUS. So it is either one domain (vertical) of 16 CPUS or 4 nodes of 4 CPUs each or
2 nodes of 8 CPUS each.

And on top of this I have to cater for a Standby environment as well. The standby will definitely not be a big box like an E12K but maybe (if talking SUN) say V880 or 4800 .

tony

At 06:54 AM 05/08/2003 -0800, you wrote:

>I think the point of RAC is fault tolerance, not scalability. If it's
>performance you want then you want a bigger box, not more boxes. 8 CPUs is
>not big. You sure don't need the expensive hardware if all you want to run
>is 8 CPUs. It would be better to go with a smaller frame and use the money
>you save to get more CPUs and additional I/O capacity. For example, instead
>of E12K with 8 CPUs, get 4810 with 12 CPUs -- unless you have definite plans
>to push the E12K out to its limits in the future. Don't forget to consider
>the backup requirements of a 5 - 10 TByte database. Another consideration,
>I think, is that those big, fancy boxes require additional sys admin skills.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>Hi All
>
>I would like to ask for your thoughts on whether to RAC or just go vertical
>(more cpu)
>
>Background
>
>Txn - OLTP like txn during day but batch extracts at night and
> very big batch extract periodically
>Data Volume - 5-10 TByte
>Data volatility - 99 % of data is very much like a ware house (unchanged)
> other 1% is read/update/delete/insert
>
>Options
>1. Say a very large server like a HP Superdome or SUN E12000
> with 8 CPUs
> Server already exist so cost is in obtaining additional CPU/Blades
> ie Traditional Server using plain old vanilla Oracle EE
> - can still increase head room.
> - batch programs can utilise all 8 CPUs
> - storage system need not cater for clustering
>
>2, Same large server like a HP Superdome or SUN E12000 but partitioned
> into two. Each with 4 CPU.
> Oracle RDBMS + RAC option
> - storage server need to cater for cluster config
> - max performance for batch is with 4 CPUs only
>
>
>Which would you prefer and why. I am not convinced with the RAC option.
>Now
>if I was going with cheaper Intel servers like Dell servers with 4 CPUS
>each, and
>purchase say 4 nodes of 4 cpus each, that would be a different story. In
>this case
>I have the equipment and ability to grow vertically.
>
>ta
>tony
>--
>Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
>--
>Author: Stephen Lee
> INET: Stephen.Lee_at_DTAG.Com
>
>Fat City Network Services -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com
>San Diego, California -- Mailing list and web hosting services
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
>to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
>the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
>(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may
>also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).

-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: 
  INET: tjambu_fatcity_at_yahoo.com.au

Fat City Network Services    -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com
San Diego, California        -- Mailing list and web hosting services
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).