Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid |
Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: switch from file system to raw device
Hi Igor,
> I don't argue this, and maybe our tests were too much "hand made" to be
> real test cases. And sometimes official statements are political choices.
You may be right: the lv and jfs where way ahead of the crowd when they came out 1991.
Migrating the boot-volume group under full load was fantastic (and still is) for me.
> Maybe you just don't want something to be cached?
power failure and so on? You can discuss this endless. :-)
> As I said before, some statements (or decisions) sometimes are political
> choices. In our case, we have in particular two systems, billing and SAP,
> that -your are right, are running on unsupported platforms- are not to be
> changed at this moment.
Don't change a running system. ;-)
And really don't do it.
A "maybe with raw it's faster" will get you into deep trouble if it
make problems, and it -will- make problems, at least downtime.
> We have compatibility statements for this
> combination of OS/Application/DB and no one is going to take any
> responsibilities to change one component, as manufacturer of the
> Application won't "just fix" eventual problems. So we are damned to stick
> to this combination until "the big bosses" decide to go onto a new
> Application, New Platform, New DB and so on and to pay $$$ for it. It's
> not the sysadmin's decision which piece to change, do you agree?
Full agree!
Been there done this, lots of $$$ wasted, application did'nt run -> no
t-shirt.
> I bet that's again just a point of view and a decision. We use Linux/Intel
> systems for auxilary systems, like test or some kind of monthly reporting
> systems, that are copies of production systems.
You know: there are cheap intel boxes and full blown systems.
We migrated from RS6000 to SGI to Siemens Fujitsu.
Older systems typically where 70k US$ and the last ones are typically
35k US$. Half the price is very nice.
They all have double power supply, Raid etc.
> No one will ever decide, at least in my company, to adapt Intel/Linux for
> production if there is no clear compatibility statement, if there is no
> support statement, and, I guess, in a large company (like IBM), they might
> not be more clever that others (like SUSE), but there are more of them and
> at the end, someone will have an idea or experience ... what do you think?
>
It took us 10 years of experience and my conclusion is:
Linux is as good or as bad as any other Unix. (HPUX, AIX, Irix, Tru64,
you name it)
> And, sorry, I just don't get the point about cheaper (faster maybe, but
> cheaper)?
You might agree: a real cheap 3.x GHz box with plenty of RAM and harddisk is as much as you pay for a new disk for your RS6000.
> ..( if things are possible and if things go
> well).
> The Intel costs something,
> the SLES for professional,
No its free. Only the support costs money.
> but more than all,
> the 10g does $$$ something. Don't you think?
>
Quite the same as your old Licence.
whatever you do: have fun,
Toni Received on Thu Sep 16 2004 - 07:16:21 CDT