| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
 |
 | |||
| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
|
| |||
Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: Why doesn't Oracle care about Linux as IBM does?
Darcy <benoit_at_no.spam.please> wrote in message news:<Pine.SOL.4.33.0108130951370.14174-100000_at_panther>...
> Actually, I care very much about Linux. While working with a small
> start-up company, the ability to use Linux as our servers saves us a fair
> bit of money (not to mention time and headaches that we would have had if
> we were to use Windows products).
Is strange, but true, that Oracle can run fine even on NTs. If Oracle has been installed on clean NT box with no other soft running, then everything (usually) works fine. However, NEVER put any BackOffice MS application on same server as Oracle is. I had encountered a terrible issues with Oracle and Exchange server running the same box. Although my opinion is that Exchange server doesn't need any help from other SW, Exchange can alone crash NT box in no time. :-)
> This is the state the company was in when I started: They had tried
> on-and-off for about 3 weeks to get Oracle working - they couldn't do it.
> I worked for about 4 hours and had DB2 up and running. It took me another
> 2 weeks to get Oracle working.
>
> then we switched up to RedHat 7.0.
>
> DB2 installed again in all of about 25 minutes.
> Oracle wouldn't work at all.
>
> We bought DB2.
I think that your problem is just lack of experiences. Oracle installation is an easy task. I never installed Oracle on Linux, but on all platforms Oracle instalation is roughly the same.
Usually install process is about:
- lot of memory and swap - space on disks - get one JRE that working (platform independent JAVA - I like thatterm)
and that's all.
To be honest, I had a plan to get Linux on my home test server (I have
Oracle on NT already there), but I've crashed Linux installation with
my partition reconfigurations before I had a chance to install Oracle.
:-)
I'm thinking about using Solaris 8 instead of Linux, because SUN made
S8 available for testing purposes for free. Idea of home test
environment same as productional servers in work is really tempting.
> I agree. :) Hey, if you have the money, then commercial servers and
> high-priced software is not a problem at all. If I were running a
> multi-million dollar operation, I wouldn't be looking at Linux either.
Yes, it's about priorities. I must admit that I have been involved by
work and maybe I have too narrow scope. For several years I'm in
banking or in general financial environment and I have no experiences
from small, start-up companies. The biggest priority for me is
support, 24/7 availability, reliability and money are something always
available. However it's not about senseless wasted money, but for
example if availability is not enough for particular solution, then
another 100.000$ spend is no problem.
I understand that in some smaller companies budget can be a major
issue. As I said my problem with Linux is that there is no one to chew
out if something went wrong. I realy hate to be in situation when I'll
be in trouble and have no one to whom I can pass it. ;-)
> I, personally, have found DB2 easier to install on just about any machine
> that I have used. I have had DB2 on NT, ME, RedHat 7.0, Redhat 6.1 and my
> Palm III. I don't think that I would be that lucky in getting Oracle on
> any/all of these.
Palm ? Isn't Palm that small thing to keep meetings in ? I have no one, I prefer Psion 5 in this field. Never dreamed about getting Oracle on it, but I definitely like that idea. :-) However my PSION went on holidays today, for one week my PSION is in care of local PSION repair staff. I don't know how I will survive this. :-)
-- _________________________________________ Dusan Bolek, Ing. Oracle team leaderReceived on Tue Aug 14 2001 - 09:59:01 CDT
 |
 |