Re: rac network question

From: Dan Norris <dannorris_at_dannorris.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 07:35:14 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <928708.85046.qm@web35413.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Ahem, "a lot" better be zero as I'm quite certain that Oracle specifically does not support the use of crossover cables in any cluster configuration. I remember because I learned that the hard way (and returned fire with "how about you document that a wee little bit please"). Anyway, I think the answer to Michael's question is yes, they should be physically separate. Even if it will work, it will be "suboptimal" as pointed out by Matt earlier. 

If it's critical, don't do it. If it's dev, you'll probably survive (except for the fact that your dev and production systems will not have this in common and therefore may have slightly different behavior).

Dan

----- Original Message ----
From: Andrew Kerber <andrew.kerber_at_gmail.com>
To: ganstadba_at_hotmail.com
Cc: Matthew Zito <mzito_at_gridapp.com>; oracle-l_at_freelists.org
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:48:51 AM
Subject: Re: rac network question


I'm not even sure it will work.  The private network is supposed to be for node-node communication.   A lot of two node racs use a crossover cable for that connection, just to make sure nothing else will interfere.  If this is truly a high visibility, mission critical database, this is simply a poor design.


On Jan 11, 2008 8:46 AM, Michael McMullen <ganstadba_at_hotmail.com> wrote:















I agree it will work, but isn't the private
and public supposed to be physically separate, not logically?


 


-----Original
Message-----

From: Matthew Zito
[mailto:mzito_at_gridapp.com] 

Sent: January
 10, 2008 
5:08
 PM

To: ganstadba_at_hotmail.com;
oracle-l_at_freelists.org

Subject: RE: rac network question


 


Actually, just so's we're all clear, with the VLAN
support that the gentleman described originally, the interfaces will appear
separate  eth0.1 and eth0.2 (note: different than eth0:1 and
eth0:2).  The traffic will be shared, but as long as the bonding works as
it should, it just means that if a card is lost, both the interconnect and the
VIP will fail over to the other link.  IMHO, while this is suboptimal, it
should work fine.


 


Matt


 


















 



















-- 
Andrew W. Kerber

'If at first you dont succeed, dont take up skydiving.'




--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Received on Fri Jan 11 2008 - 09:35:14 CST

Original text of this message