Re: OCFS2

From: Mladen Gogala <gogala_at_sbcglobal.net>
Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2005 13:01:43 +0000
Message-Id: <1123506103l.7138l.0l@medo.noip.com>

On 08/08/2005 01:19:25 AM, Billy Verreynne (JW) wrote:
>
> Mladen Gogala wrote:
>
> >> I'm a firm believer in "you get what you pay for"...and with OCFS
> that
> >> is so true.
> >
> >That, unfortunately, applies to Linux as well. Stability-wise, it's
> >nowhere near HP-UX, AIX or Solaris.
>
> Bull. And we're using HP-UX, Solaris and Linux. And yes, we *paid* for
> Linux and we have support for it. Linux is as stable as HP-UX and
> Solaris.

Take a look at the list of patches for 9.2.0.6 on Linux. Cluster manager was actually downgraded by 9.2.0.6 installation. Patches are always late for Linux and bugs are more severe. I run Linux in the office (RH ES 3.0, fully licensed) and at home (FC3) with wide variety of versions, ranging from 9.2.0.5 to 10.2. I am by no means a beginner with Linux and I have experienced a fair share of problems (CUPS sometimes must be restarted, some ethernet drivers were faulty, NVIDIA doesn't work with dual monitors). In addition to that, Linux doesn't have the standard set of memory tuning variables (freelim, freegoal,growlim) which means that tuning it is extremely hard. As I said, you get what you pay for.

-- 
Mladen Gogala
http://www.mgogala.com


--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

Received on Mon Aug 08 2005 - 08:03:43 CDT