Re: ORACLE on LINUX

Bjorn Borud wrote:
> why on earth would you want to use raw partitions? if your database
> needs are in the same ballpark as what PostgreSQL providers, chances
> are that raw partitions would be a complete waste.
>
> let the OS worry about how to best use the disk. talking to disk is
> the responsibility of the OS, not some random application that thinks
> it will do the job better. raw partitions are usually DBA
> superstition on smaller systems.

Maybe.

While our projects are relatively small, a key component is access time and I understand that Oracle on SCO using the raw partitions greatly improves performance. Are you saying that this is only the case for extremely large databases (> 1G)?

I am rather fearful of raw partitions, though, in that it may be difficult to back them up without using proprietary tools -- something we don't like to do.

> have a look at Solid. it is extremely portable, easy to use, stable
> and it doesn't cost an arm and a leg, so you won't have to fork over a
> lot of dough to install it. (depending on what you want to use it for
> it might be a good idea to look into the various licenses they
> offer).

I am hearing Solid, YARD, and ADABAS are worth a look. thanks.

I would prefer Oracle, personally, given that we have some already talented and experienced PL/SQL developers and Oracle seems to support the amount of SQL and "object database" functions that we need.

thornton Received on Thu Jun 25 1998 - 00:00:00 CDT