Steve Howard wrote:
> Hi Kevin,
>
> pdxkevinc_at_gmail.com wrote:
>> I am not unbiased and I hope it hasn't sounded as though I'm presenting
>> myself as such on my blog. I do try my best to fortify all my positions
>> with as much fact as possible though.
>>
>
> I always enjoy reading your content, whether on your blog or
> whitepapers I have found on the net that you have written. It's always
> well thought out, and extremely informative. It's just that by
> definition, polyserve competes in the storage management space. I
> apologize if I offended you, as I noted, I always enjoy your
> commentary.
>
>> As an aside, do all your RAC SGAs have the same ASM extent pointer
>> array content?
>>
>>
>
> We are in the beginning process of building our first *RAC* on ASM
> storage (we just completed the install about a month ago). During
> heavy performance testing it got as high as 3GB, but we didn't receive
> any ORA-4031's (7.5GB max sga). We didn't have to resize our datafiles
> (the cause of bug #4237613, DOCID 390251.1), so maybe we escaped
> unscathed :)
>
> Thanks,
>
> Steve
The question I would like to append to this is "has PolyServe patched
things up with Oracle?" It wasn't that long ago that Oracle's attitude
toward PolyServe made PolyServe a risky choice. I've seen no evidence
that anything has changed.
--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace x with u to respond)
Puget Sound Oracle Users Group
www.psoug.org
Received on Tue Nov 28 2006 - 10:41:20 CST
