Re: Oracle RAC vs VM WARE

On May 11, 11:17 am, "ame..._at_iwc.net" <ame..._at_iwc.net> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I'm not real familiar with either of the two technologies I am posting
> about, but, we are setting up 2 new servers to run 5 database
> instances.
>
> Currently we have 5 older machines, and they are about to go. We are
> trying to decide if it would be better to run VM WARE and have 5
> virtual machines between the 2 new machines, with the databases
> replicating themselves on the other for failover.
>
> OR
>
> Run Oracle RAC.
>
> >From what I understand, RAC will make better use of resources should
>
> one instance need it. But I think we're talking about multiple Oracle
> Homes on the same box right?
>
> Can anyone offer some feedback maybe on some of their experiences??
>
> Thanks!

>From what you've posted, it has nothing to do with multiple home, it
has to do with multiple instances running from one or more databases.

VM is great if you have 1 Windows box and need to run 9i OEM, 10g grid, and other point versions on the same machine. This is requires multiple homes to house the specific binary point versions. The VM environments make this easy, otherwise you are monkeying with path settings trying to get things to work right. Again, multiple legacy version home management on Windows is a pain, so VM eliminates this. The other nice thing is that legacy can be plugged in when necessary from an image, rather than a soup-to-nuts install. Set it up once in VM, keep it running, or put it away until needed. All that is required is to boot up the image and away you go.

For your case I'd go with the VM Ware and failover option for legacy database. RAC experience is good to have, but is it worth the learning curve. I can say from experience that setting up well performing RAC has quite a few more moving parts than does a simple replication solution using VM.

http://www.miracleas.dk/WritingsFromMogens/YouProbablyDontNeedRACUSVersion.pdf Received on Fri May 11 2007 - 22:25:25 CDT