Re: 90GB table on Windows 2000

In <3da68457$0$1292$ed9e5944_at_reading.news.pipex.net> "Niall Litchfield" <n-litchfield_at_audit-commission.gov.uk> writes:
>"Jim Stern" <jdstern_at_k2services.com> wrote in message
>news:ao52s5$fdl$1_at_news.utelfla.com...
>> Damn right... NT is definitely a no no for real critical applications, too
>> many variables for the O/S to be stable.

>Are you sure this isn't just a knee jerk response. We have 2000 servers
>running line of business apps that have been up for (checks uptime) 118
>days. The downtime was for power work. Setup correctly windows 2000 *is* a
>stable OS.

I had a Windows NT 4.0 SP3 (or 4) instance of Oracle 7.3.2.3 running for just over 3 years (April 1997 to May 31, 2000), no reboots, no restarts (and no hotfixes or other updates, acceptably risky with the rest of my infrastructure). The only reason we brought it down then was we needed the machine to move, post Y2K.

The machine literally did NOTHING but service the database. I think the keyboard was touched maybe once a year.

Andy

-- 
Andrew Finkenstadt (http://www.finkenstadt.com/andy/)