Re: Building a 10gR1 RAC
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 10:59:41 -0500
Here's the defining text from the note.
Oracle Applications Release 11*i* (11.5.10) has numerous configuration options that can be chosen to suit particular business scenarios, uptime requirements, hardware capability, and availability requirements. This document describes how to migrate Oracle Applications Release 11*i* (Release 18.104.22.168) running on a single database instance to a Real Application Clusters (RAC) environment running Oracle database server 10g Release 2 ( 10.2.0.1) with Automatic Storage Management (ASM).
Note the (Release 22.214.171.124) in the quoted text.
We are making the change because we are currently on HP PA-RISC. HP is discontinuing the platform. Our hardware comes off lease August of 2009 so we have to go somewhere. HP has chosen to go with a new platform so we are going to explore x86. I guess based on the feedback I'm getting here I'll tell management that 10gR1 RAC is too risky.
On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 10:51 AM, Dan Norris <dannorris_at_dannorris.com> wrote:
> I absolutely agree with Hemant--if you're making a significant change in
> architecture, presumably it is due to a business requirement for some
> better scalability and/or redundancy (HA) in the environment. If that
> assumption is correct, you'd be very wise to pick a well-supported,
> widely deployed release like 10g R2 instead of 10g R1. I think you'll
> have a much better chance at success on 10g R2 and you'll certainly find
> more helpful hints from mailing lists, forums, and (gasp) Oracle Support.
> Having said all that, I'm not an Apps DBA, but from my novice reading of
> section 1.2 in the note referenced below, I don't see the 126.96.36.199 is
> required. Maybe 188.8.131.52 is disguised as some other name that is listed
> there. The example that follows in section 2 does depict 184.108.40.206, but
> that doesn't mean that the example is using the minimums. Regardless,
> based on what little I know about apps, 220.127.116.11 does sound to be a
> Good Thing all around and something you should consider if stability,
> availability, and scalability are important to your business.
> Hemant K Chitale wrote:
> > Allan,
> > See MetaLink Note#362135.1 titled
> > "Configuring Oracle Applications Release 11i with 10g Release2 Real
> > Application Clusters and Automatic Storage Management"
> > You should be on 18.104.22.168 -- if you ARE taking the effort to go RAC,
> > why not CU2 ?
> > CU2 would be worth it.
> > Hemant K Chitale