RE: cost-effective, low-performance options for RAC?
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 16:55:44 -0500
Message-ID: <02b101d17597$715c9760$5415c620$_at_rsiz.com>
Install the RAC version of the software. Define and run a single instance. There. It is still technically RAC by name and for your described requirements that is the most cost effective way I can think of short of getting them to not even calling it RAC. Please notice that I did *not* bad mouth RAC for multiple instances running requirements. You just don’t have them.
mwf
From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org [mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org] On Behalf Of Chris King
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2016 11:54 AM
To: Oracle-l Digest Users
Subject: cost-effective, low-performance options for RAC?
I was asked an odd question today. A customer is determined to use an Oracle RAC solution, and we are trying to convince them that in their case, this is too big a solution for what they need. In the meantime, however, I've been asked a few interesting questions, which I would love to have your feedback on.
The customer's requirement is for a small database, with only 200 users maximum, and not concurrent users. We're not looking for high-performance because the database will not be heavily used.
I've always used fibre connects with Oracle RAC. Is it possible to run RAC with something other than fibre? I've been asked if we could run RAC with a single SAS attached disk array.. I'm assuming not, but maybe there are other lower-cost RAC compatible storage and network connectivity options.
May I have your feedback on this?
Thanks!
-ChrisK
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Received on Thu Mar 03 2016 - 22:55:44 CET