I thought you needed an X server for at least the Database install.
--
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
Audit Commission UK
"JustAnotherDBA" <burttemp1REMOVE_THIS_at_bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:nmLma.9799$9K3.767_at_fe05.atl2.webusenet.com...
> Linux for the OS ! This one is easy :)
>
> Also, run Linux without any X server too. But, to do this you will need
> version 9.0.3 (or newer?) of 9iAS and then you have to upgrade the Java
> (there are instructions in the install for running OEM(which is required)
> without an X server to display to). Actually, the 9.0.3 version was not
> available (3 months ago) on Solaris for running the heavier pieces like
> Portal and Business Intelligence.
>
> But with the memory limitations you give, I suspect running BOTH 9i DB and
> 9iAS will be almost impossible (or slowww). The database might be ok, but
> not 9iAS . Then again, it might depend on what options you install for
9iAS
> . The liter version (just Web Cache and J2EE) might be ok. But, if you
> install Portal, Business Intelligence (Forms and Report Server), I can't
> imagine it working very well or at all.
>
> Maybe the Oracle install on Linux is more forgiving, but on Solaris, it
> would not even proceed if TMP wasn't 1G, /etc/hosts had to have a fully
> qualified hostname, and memory was checked too I think (or it was
> recommended to be at least 1 Gig+ for running both 9iAS and 9iDB) .
>
> Actually, the install of 9iAS highly recommends running the 9iDB and 9iAS
on
> different machines . AND, if you install Portal or "Business
Intelligence",
> they will require the 9iDB have OiD installed (another "hog").
>
> Oh yeah, be prepared to make your System tablespace extremely large for
> Portal (PlSql?).
>
> I had many problems trying to run both 9iDB and 9iAS on the same (much
> beefier) Solaris system.
>
> Ended up giving up on the Portal and Business Intelligence (not really
> needed in our company). Also, have a dedicated Solaris machine for running
> the 9iAS.
>
> Going to try and upgrade our 8174 DBs to 9.2.0.3 later this year.
>
> Good luck!
>
> --
>
> "Jared" <jared_at_hwai.com> wrote in message
> news:480f610.0304140618.7f52cfc7_at_posting.google.com...
> > Here's an apples and oranges question that I am trying to figure out:
> >
> > Given the following two machines (for argument's sake, assume each has
> > the same disks and 100 MHz FSB speed (twin 7200 RPM Seagates or
> > Maxtors, EIDE unless I can get Linux happy with the ATA interface).
> > Assume memory is not a constraint even at 768MB total, I can keep the
> > SGA small for now - so I guess it comes down to the processors):
> >
> > twin 533-MHz Celeron single 900MHz Athlon (T-bird)
> > 768MB 1 GB memory
> >
> > Which would make a better Oracle server? Should it run Win2K or
> > Linux? I am starting a venture with a friend at home and am going to
> > set up a machine with 9i and 9iAS. I would rather keep them on the
> > same machine for now (I have configured n-tier professionally several
> > times, but I only have so many machines at home).
> >
> > Opinions solicited!
> >
> > TIA -
> >
> > Jared Hecker
> > theheckers.org_at_jared (or something like that - reply-to address not
> > operational)
>
>
>
Received on Tue Apr 15 2003 - 04:13:07 CDT
