Re: Which Linux for Oracle 9i on AMD Opteron?

From: Haximus <e_at_t.me>
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 00:21:15 GMT
Message-ID: <%LsVd.23226$LN5.13948@edtnps90>

Frank van Bortel wrote:
> Haximus wrote:
>

>> Fabrizio wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Frank van Bortel wrote:
>>>
>>>> DA Morgan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> NetComrade wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> If you had a choice between RH and SuSe which one would you pick?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I found a post that says that Oracle develops on SuSe, but given that
>>>>>> we will most likely be running Veritas on Linux, so far RH AS 3.0 is
>>>>>> the only choice.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However, I was curious if there is a comparison between the two
>>>>>> somewhere from an Oracle Admin perspective.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>> .......
>>>>>> We use Oracle 8.1.7.4 and 9.2.0.5 on Solaris 2.7 boxes
>>>>>> remove NSPAM to email
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't know what Oracle develops on but there is no question that
>>>>> what the corporation runs itself on: Redhat.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But what would be the difference? The extras, the utilities,
>>>> the cream on top. Do you care? I don't.
>>>> The kernel would be (about) the same, apart from RH ES4 having
>>>> less patches that SuSE, but that is because SuSE was very fast
>>>> bringing out the latest kernel, whereas Red Hat waited for a
>>>> more mature version.
>>>>
>>>> Of course, a bit of a Linux adept would go and compile his/her
>>>> own kernel, wouldn't he?
>>>
>>>
>>> You would lose support from both: Oracle and the Linux vendor. :(
>>
>>
>>
>> I was told that Oracle has a utility to check the MD5 checksums of rpm
>> packages installed, if they don't match the release checksums they have
>> grounds to refuse support.  This is to deter people from installing 
>> Oracle
>> on "Lineox" (RH AS ripoff) and variants then attempting to qualify for
>> support.

>
>
> Sounds like an urban legend in the making.
> If that would be true, they would need a database with all
> checksums of every version ever released in the update program.

This excerpt is right from the Oracle certification grid:

"It is a requirement that the OS (binary) has not been modified. A script has been provided to Oracle Support Services to run against the customers environment in order to assure the binary has not been modified. If the binary proves to have been modified, the customer will need to support it themselves or call Red Hat for technical support."

>
> Never heard of Lineox, but WhiteBox surely is no rip off; RH started
> as GPL, they're obliged to publish the source, and WB just compiled
> that (which is hard enough - try rebuilding the kernel, as delivered.
> Not!)

Lineox, same thing as WB I guess... took Red Hat's AS source rpms and removed all the proprietary references... distributes it for $20 a pop as an AS replacement. Received on Wed Mar 02 2005 - 18:21:15 CST