Re: Oracle archive logging over a Windows NT share - does it work?

From: Paul Drake <drak0nian_at_yahoo.com>
Date: 5 Feb 2003 16:57:31 -0800
Message-ID: <1ac7c7b3.0302051657.46b9620b@posting.google.com>

konstantin_kudin_at_yahoo.com (Konstantin Kudin) wrote in message news:<ff88eb34.0302050900.5d94cca3_at_posting.google.com>...
> drak0nian_at_yahoo.com (Paul Drake) wrote in message news:<1ac7c7b3.0302042216.10dc0092_at_posting.google.com>...
> > konstantin_kudin_at_yahoo.com (Konstantin Kudin) wrote in message news:<ff88eb34.0302031410.64bc13fd_at_posting.google.com>...
> > > Hi
> <snip>
> > > In my system (Oracle 8.1.7 with NT4 sp6a) even if I map a drive on
> >
> > Hey - how goes the NT4 sp6a standby project on 8.1.7?
> > Eventually, you will tire of all of the needless restraints imposed by
> > NT4, most likely before you complete your project.
>
> I'll address this below.
>
> > Did you check out the end of error correction notice on Metalink for
> > 8.1.7 yet?
> > Its for real. 31-Dec-2003, no more error correction, unless your CFO
> > coughs up some major bucks for extended maintenance.
>
> That is true, I did check. After 12/31/2003 the support will cost
> $$$.
> But this is way beyond my jurisdiction.
>
> <snipped a description of access permissions in WinNT>
<more stuff snipped>
>
> Paul
>
> As I've probably mentioned, at present time I have pretty much *0*
> influence with respect to migrating the system to W2k. If I could, I'd
> be already running the whole thing under Linux where all the little
> things are easy.
>
> I did notice that under NT4 there is a whole bunch
> of small things which are not that straightforward to do and thus add
> up really fast such that the whole thing becomes a big pain in the
> arse. For example, installing Oracle on P4 with NT4 is a bit trickier
> than with W2K, and a few more steps are required.
>
> What are the things related to Oracle which are easy under W2K but
> hard under NT4?

wow - if this would have been 2 years ago, I would have written up a one page article on its merits. At this point, it would be to discuss the advantages of moving off of W2K ... to Linux or to MS Windows 2003 server.

(#1 there is the SMT in the P IV CPUs that one must disable on W2K).

Ok, this is far from complete, but I'm not going to spend alot of time on it.
Off the top of my head ...

NTFS
W2K:

- 8k blocksize matches my db_block_size volumes for datafiles
- 64k blocksize nice for archived redo logs, staging areas for backups
- dynamic partitions - can be resized, mirrored, striped.

NT4:
- 4k max blocksize for filesystem

either way - I still wouldn't use software raid. but it is nice to be able to add space to a volume.

services:
W2K:
- assiging a user account to a service easier - automatically grants the system privilege "log on as service" to the user

- services can be restarted automatically
- can set dependencies
- can generate event on service failure

scheduled tasks:
W2K:
- assigning a user account or group to a scheduled job - advanced properties very nice, can start a job and have it run numerous times for a time interval and terminate (such as movement of archived redo logs)
- can set start date/end date for a scheduled task - gui in control panel not from NT3.51 (resource kit). NT4:
- sucks
- resource kit required, whereby your crease a service for the task. (this is NT 3.51 stuff re-used).
- soon.exe (RK) command could reschedule the task, but not terminate.

event logging/mmc
W2K:
- the microsoft management console used for computer management doesn't suck.
- you can create your own custom mmc windows - integration with Oracle administrative assistance, performance monitor.
- lvm used for disk management is decent, Dell ships boxes with the enhanced Veritas LVM for windows 2000 - which is very nice.

NT4:
-sucks.

I'd highly recommend the book:
"Oracle 9i for Windows 2000 Tips and Techniques" by Jesse, Hart and Sale ISBN 0-07-219462-2 most of their material works for Oracle 8.1.7 on W2K.

and download every free tool you see up on http://www.sysinternals.com.
You're going to want a copy of pskill.exe for sure.

I can't argue against this being easier to do on Linux.

Have you downloaded Cygwin yet?
http://sources.redhat.com/cygwin/

Paul Received on Wed Feb 05 2003 - 18:57:31 CST