Re: MS SQL Server Evaluation

Howard J. Rogers wrote:
>
> Now this is where it gets interesting, because my list of RAC benefits would
> read:
>
> 1. High availability
> 2. Scale Up (do more work in the same time)
> 3. Speed Up (do the same work in less time)

Can we add

4. Rolling Upgrades

that is being flogged with RAC in 10g? I realize there are likely a number of caveats to that 'capability', but if even somewhat true, this has got to be a real benefit for some shops.

BTW - The majority of customers I see have 2-4 CPU 'SMP' (ignoring the local telco with significantly larger - up to 64 - processor systems). I have to agree that most customers I see do not need the HA or scalability [theoretical] benefits of RAC - yet. So I tend to agree with your argument as valid across my customer base.

Based on previous discussions, Daniel's customer base hass proven to be significantly different from mine. Therefore he, and they, apparently can quickly see benefit from RAC.

<speculation>
When I worked for Oracle (I saw Oracle8, Oracle8i, Oracle9i and Oracle9iR2 released), we were strongly encouraged not to say (or even imply) that RAC is an upgrade to OPS. The water-cooler reasoning included: OPS had such a poor reputation that marketing wanted to separate RAC from OPS in customers' minds. (Other such talk centered around price differences between OPS and RAC.)

However, the same water-cooler discussions did conclude that code and/or algorithms from OPS were kept where appropriate, and we had a lot of fun speculating what 'appropriate' meant.
</speculation>

/Hans Received on Mon Mar 15 2004 - 16:02:24 CST