Re: yipeee!

"Serge Rielau" <srielau_at_ca.eye-be-em.com> wrote in message news:bvtjk7$bvp$1_at_hanover.torolab.ibm.com...
> My DB2 "offer" would be DB2 without DPF on two AIX boxes (OP wants AIX
> it seems). The seoncd box licenced as idle standby only (1 CPU).
> With clusterware to handle the failover.
> This is under the assumption that a rewrite of the app to a relational
> DBMS is intended.
> There is not enough information to home in on which edition or box-size
> to home in to.
>
> It seems Mark A. believes CICS would be less invasive. I'm not familiar
> with either VSE or CICS so I keep my mouth shut.

ditto.

>
> Let's presume 100% scalability for RAC (if you want to use it) for the
> sake of math (and to not start another flame war) and similar resource
> requirements (AIX, RAM/box, comparable disk overall).
>
> Your turn
> Serge

:(

I think I would go with one of

two AIX boxes one running DB with Oracle DataGuard to handle standby to the second pretty much as per your solution. n box implementation of 9i RAC with transparent application failover.

On the other hand the more we learn about the app the more business critical it seems and so the more conservative (read why move it at all?) I become.

-- 
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
Audit Commission UK