Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> Re: Oracle Standard Edition & RAC

Re: Oracle Standard Edition & RAC

From: Paul Drake <bdbafh_at_gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 17:18:58 -0500
Message-ID: <910046b40701041418s274d47f5v5d712bc03f2f2501@mail.gmail.com>


On 1/4/07, Kevin Closson <kevinc_at_polyserve.com> wrote:
>
>
> There are an awful lot of systems out there that have time to do batch
> stuff (like stats etc) overnight, that would arguably do index creation out
> of hours as well and don't do 300M worth of data transfer/redo generation in
> a 10 minute window of normal use, let alone per second. A rather surprising
> number of these people believe they need/have been sold/want to imagine that
> they are large enough to need EE and not a 'Workgroup' product. I disagree
> with them:)
>
> I'm with youso if SE fits 200-500 users and such systems don't need
> PQOhence we label it "Workgroup", why Oracle at all? I'm not being
> "typically ascerbic Kevin" here. I don't know how app development on SE
> compares to, say SQL Server and what the portfolio of apps looks like with
> Oracle for workgroups over other databases. Can someome tell me why Oracle
> at all at such a low scale?
>

  1. backup/restore/recovery is rock solid.
  2. if/when time comes to throw money at the problem in terms of bigger box, more CPUs, EE, partitioning, etc ... no re-write of the application is required.
  3. because the CFO likes it
  4. in 10g, they don't need a dba.

ok, I'll stop there.

Paul

-- 
-- ALTER SESSION SET EVENTS 'immediate trace name hanganalyze level 4';

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Received on Thu Jan 04 2007 - 16:18:58 CST

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US