From oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org Mon Jul 18 14:28:12 2005 Return-Path: Received: from air891.startdedicated.com (root@localhost) by orafaq.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j6IJSCoF012030 for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2005 14:28:12 -0500 X-ClientAddr: 206.53.239.180 Received: from turing.freelists.org (freelists-180.iquest.net [206.53.239.180]) by air891.startdedicated.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j6IJS2IP012008 for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2005 14:28:03 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id CD85C1D6BC8; Mon, 18 Jul 2005 14:27:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 20717-07; Mon, 18 Jul 2005 14:27:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 4AF831D6BBA; Mon, 18 Jul 2005 14:27:59 -0500 (EST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C58BCE.8DDDA9E3" Subject: RE: x86, 64-bit Linux, RAC Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 15:26:10 -0400 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: x86, 64-bit Linux, RAC Thread-Index: AcWLyk4OsrB+7fwJRwuw4lIVJTDonQAAqFWq From: "Marquez, Chris" To: , "oracle-l" X-archive-position: 22617 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org Errors-To: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org X-original-sender: cmarquez@collegeboard.org Precedence: normal Reply-To: cmarquez@collegeboard.org X-list: oracle-l X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p9 (Debian) at avenirtech.net X-mailscan-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mailscan-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on air891.startdedicated.com X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=ham version=2.63 ------_=_NextPart_001_01C58BCE.8DDDA9E3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Bob, >>do you think the platform is ready "enough" for primetime=20 I think you get more debate or disagreement about (use of) these...the = "readiness" or "stability", "usefulness", in this order; 1.) RAC 2.) 10g 3.) [Oracle] 64-bit Intel/AMD my $.02 Chris Marquez Oracle DBA -----Original Message----- From: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org on behalf of Murching, Bob Sent: Mon 7/18/2005 2:55 PM To: 'oracle-l' Subject: x86, 64-bit Linux, RAC =20 64-bit hardware from AMD and Intel are in fairly wide supply today, and Linux has had a 64-bit flavor for a while now. We are considering a = 64-bit x86 platform for running 10g RAC. Yes, it probably isn't quite as = buttoned down as SPARC 64-bit, and yes 10g RAC on 64-bit Intel/AMD probably = qualifies as somewhat close to the leading edge. All that said, does anyone here have experience deploying on this = platform? What works / worked, what doesn't / didn't, and do you think the = platform is ready "enough" for primetime or does it need to cook? We are not considering this platform for something that human lives depend on, so a little risk is OK. What I'm not sure of is "how much" risk is involved = at this point in time. From what I've seen / read / used myself, the = platform is "almost" production-ready for most conventional purposes, but with a couple of quirks to work through. Thoughts? Bob ------_=_NextPart_001_01C58BCE.8DDDA9E3 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RE: x86, 64-bit Linux, RAC

Bob,

>>do you think the platform is ready "enough" for = primetime

I think you get more debate or disagreement about (use of) these...the = "readiness" or "stability", "usefulness", = in this order;
1.) RAC
2.) 10g
3.) [Oracle] 64-bit Intel/AMD

my $.02

Chris Marquez
Oracle DBA


-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org on behalf of Murching, Bob
Sent: Mon 7/18/2005 2:55 PM
To: 'oracle-l'
Subject: x86, 64-bit Linux, RAC

64-bit hardware from AMD and Intel are in fairly wide supply today, = and
Linux has had a 64-bit flavor for a while now.  We are considering = a 64-bit
x86 platform for running 10g RAC.  Yes, it probably isn't quite as = buttoned
down as SPARC 64-bit, and yes 10g RAC on 64-bit Intel/AMD probably = qualifies
as somewhat close to the leading edge.

All that said, does anyone here have experience deploying on this = platform?
What works / worked, what doesn't / didn't, and do you think the = platform is
ready "enough" for primetime or does it need to cook?  We = are not
considering this platform for something that human lives depend on, so = a
little risk is OK.  What I'm not sure of is "how much" = risk is involved at
this point in time.  From what I've seen / read / used myself, the = platform
is "almost" production-ready for most conventional purposes, = but with a
couple of quirks to work through.

Thoughts?

Bob

------_=_NextPart_001_01C58BCE.8DDDA9E3-- -- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l