Re: Metrics for Swingbench benchmarks

From: Dan Norris <dannorris_at_dannorris.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 15:38:13 -0400
Message-ID: <47DC25A5.1050006@dannorris.com>

Yes, I completely agree. I was more than a little surprised to hear that it worked as well as it did for so long with no maintenance at all. Unfortunately, they've also never done any Linux updates and their Linux boxes crash (kernel panic) about once/week due to memory management issues that are known bugs in the version they're running.

Perhaps also not surprising is that they never paid for support contracts for either Red Hat Linux (beyond the first year support) nor Oracle, so they couldn't upgrade/patch until they got that settled.

Incase anyone's interested, this is a Dell-installed environment running on EMC's Clariion FC storage.

dn

Niall Litchfield wrote:

I'll skip the backup remark because, well it's indefensible really. On the other hand isn't this actually quite a testament to the quality of early 10g RAC?

On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 3:45 AM, Dan Norris <dannorris@dannorris.com> wrote:

Agreed, but I was surprised to find a customer recently that has a
single database (it's a 2-node RAC) that was installed on RH 3 and
10.1.0.3 about 3 years ago and they've never done any patches, upgrades,
or DB maintenance to the system in that period

 

--
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
http://www.orawin.info

-- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l Received on Sat Mar 15 2008 - 14:38:13 CDT