Re: Parrallel Server Question

In article <3DC94B4B.50004_at_networkcloud.com>, Chuckster says...
>
>
>I just wanted to inquiry about the overall management of parrallel
>oracle, is it too much a pain in the ass?
>
>We mainly need it for redundancy. Small downtimes of 1 hour or less are
>acceptable and we currently have stand-by backup databases. However, I
>would sleep better with parallel server in place, unless it is a major
>pain in the ass.
>
>This particuliar database is currently on Windows 2000 but we have a
>plan to migrate to Solaris by Q1 next year. The move to parrallel would
>likely take place at that time or shortly thereafter.
>
>Thx for any info,
>CC
>
>
>
>-----------== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
> http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
>-----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Unlimited Fast Downloads - 19 Servers =-----

In that timeframe I wouldn't even bother looking at OPS. Use RAC with 9i. Having said that, if you can stand an hour of downtime, then you probably don't even need to go that far. Just use the failover capability built into the OS. It may take 20-30 minutes to failover, but that isn't an issue for you.

HTH. Additions and corrections welcome.

Pete

SELECT standard_disclaimer, witty_remark FROM company_requirements; Received on Wed Nov 06 2002 - 17:52:01 CST