Re: Oracle 10g RAC performance

From: DA Morgan <damorgan_at_psoug.org>
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2007 11:42:09 -0700
Message-ID: <1177785729.63934@bubbleator.drizzle.com>

Mladen Gogala wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 17:48:53 -0700, hpuxrac wrote:
>

>> There's a reasonable smart guy who wrote "Why you probably don't need
>> RAC" ... there's somebody who is clued in to the real world.

>
> Pushing RAC to everybody is, at least in my opinion, a very dangerous
> policy yet Oracle is doing just that. RAC is not a solution for
> everything. One would think that they would learn from IBM, DEC and
> Microsoft but, apparently, not so. I usually explain the concept like
> this: if you have a car capable of taking 4 people across 55 miles in
> 1 hour, then adding a second car, chained to the first car, bumper to
> bumper, will not help you with taking 4 people across 110 miles in 1 hour.
> Buying a faster car (and a radar detector) will.
> That is precisely what people are trying to do: making their apps running
> twice as fast by adding a second node, chained to the first in bumper to
> bumper fashion.

I would agree that "pushing" RAC is not the solution. But providing information to customers on what RAC is and what it does is an invaluable service in a world where management and customer expectations are often 7x24x365.

If nothing elsee, the implementation of RAC everywhere, will force a lot of companies selling junk to clean up their schemas and their code.

While I agree with Mogens on many things ... RAC is quite often a good solution and Windows quite often is not.

-- 
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 Sat Apr 28 2007 - 13:42:09 CDT