Re: 10g RAC, nonRAC difficulty, cost comparison

jdevroberto_at_yahoo.com wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I've been asked to come up with a general answer to this question:
>
> Comapred to standard oracle,
> how difficult is 10g RAC to setup, and maintain?
>
> My answer:
> oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
> On a scale of 1 to 10
>
> RAC would be a 6 or 7
> and nonRAC is about a 3.

Given the scientific nature of your project your numbers seem reasonable.

> One problem with RAC is the shared storage requirement.
> You will need to invest in an array and fibre channel technology.

Actually this is probably the smallest issue of all. One can easily ignore this entirely by purchasing the correct storage solution, NetApp, which is what Oracle did.

> With nonRAC you can use cheap SCSI drives.
>
> If you are already investing in fibre channel,
> RAC is more compelling.
> oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
>
> Do any of you Oracle experts have any opinions on this RAC
> nonRAC discussion?
>
> -jd

Choose the solution Oracle chose. What you don't explain is the "why" about RAC. Is it for TAF? For high availability? For scaling? For financial reasons? I think the biggest challenges are in learning to maintain and tune the beast.

-- 
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)