Re: Database won't mount, but no errors reported ???

"JustAnotherDBA" <jadba_at_bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:it6W9.7084$F_3.220_at_news.bellsouth.net...
> As everyone else has said, this is a known issue on Solaris.
>
> FYI... When Oracle hangs at startup, a good trick to see more
informational
> error messages is to turn on trace at the server level with init.ora parm
> sql_trace=true. Not sure what it would say, but I know 1 time this came in
> handy when we hit the max open files set at the kernel level.
>
> Just do not leave this parm in the init.ora, it generates a billion trace
> files.
>
> Note: Has anyone ever heard of Windoze machines being up for over 7 months
?
> We schedule nightly reboots on most of our Windoze servers and thankfully
I
> don't work on those. We , of course , run Oracle on a real OS.
>

Just my 2c:

Windoze isn't so bad. It just gets *used* badly.

IMHO, it's pretty stable for small/medium size installations (from NT351, NT4, W2K through XP Pro), **provided it is administered correctly**. Many years ago I ran an important accounting system on Oracle 7.3.3 and 7.3.4 for a medium-sized Lloyd's insurance broker on NT4 in the City of London for months, without the need to reboot.

A decent Unix is better and more scalable, but of course you pay more.

The biggest problem, I think, is that because Windoze *looks* easy, companies think they can employ the same amateur idiot like they did for their departmental desktops and Access databases, and expect the corporate level of resilience and availability.

And of course, we had the fools who would try to do file and print serving and all the other stuff on an NT box, in addition to database serving.

In short, if we had the same degree of professionalism and competence with our NT Admin as we have in our Unix Admin, the difference would be much narrower.

Flame away!

Regards,
Paul Received on Sat Jan 18 2003 - 12:52:29 CST