Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: Hardware Reccomendations

Re: Hardware Reccomendations

From: Chris Weiss <weisschr_at_pilot.msu.edu>
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 09:06:27 -0400
Message-ID: <7k2up2$92o$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu>


<tim_mcconechy_at_my-deja.com> wrote in message news:7k2bbi$j6u$1_at_nnrp1.deja.com...
> Hi. I am putting together some hardware reccomendations for a customer
> and would like to here what people say.
>
> This company will have 80 users - 50-60 concurrent.
> Over 15 databases - 1 per product.
>
> The organization has very little Oracle know how and no UNIX servers at
> the moment.
> For this reason I am thinking NT would be easiest.

In general, UNIX is not for the inexperienced. If your company has no experience, and you are trying to do this internally, then you should stick to NT.

 > I would like to know how many servers and what you would reccomend as
> far as resources,hardware,OS..

The number of users and servers depends more on the types of applications, the size of the data, and the fragility of the data. For example, if you need Archive log mode, you will need more disk.

In general, large batch applications with large writes and large reads work best with large fast disks put into stripe sets. Transactional system work best with smaller disks and more discrete arrangements of your tablespaces.

> Number of servers...

This depends on the type of disk subsystem, amount of ram, and number of CPUs per server.

> Hardware...

More ram, faster disks, and Xeon processors with 2Mb cache work best. If you are buying dells, get a Perc disk controller with as big a disk controller cache as you can afford.

> Training (number of full time DBA's)...

Depending on your applications, two good DBAs should be plenty. However, training will cost you. Contact Oracle.

> Database Version...

8i has all the features I have wanted in Oracle for quite some time: partions, true temporary tables, etc.

> RAID-version

RAID 0 tends to give best performance, RAID 0+1 or RAID 10 is the most expensive and most robust. You will also want a disk array that supports "hot spares." RAID 5 is the cheapest for redundancy, but performance can suffer.

> My current thought is around 1 server per two databases spilt up over
> usage.

If your databases are small, one server could easily handle 15 schemas (I wouldn't recommend 15 instances on an NT server).

You might want to buy a week of Oracle consulting to get your hardware properly sized.

> The servers each a Dell Power-edge PC with a 5 Disk RAID array of some
> kind. 2-3 full time DBA's, oracle 8.0.5

> Or ?? large UNIX Servers.
Received on Mon Jun 14 1999 - 08:06:27 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US