On Aug 3, 5:48 pm, joel garry <joel-ga..._at_home.com> wrote:
> On Aug 3, 6:19 am, Ben <bal..._at_comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 3, 9:09 am, Steve Howard <stevedhow..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 3, 8:40 am, Ben <bal..._at_comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > > > For the most part we finally got our problems worked out. We had to go
> > > > from 4 Cpu's to 8, but that seems to have done the trick.
> > > > It would be nice if there were some kind of guide ( maybe there is and
> > > > I haven't seen it ) as to system requirements when moving from version
> > > > to version. Something along the lines of how much memory and cpus are
> > > > needed for this size of database on this os with this many users. I
> > > > know it would be hard to generalize but they should at least be able
> > > > to tell us what the minimum requirements for a setup would be. I've
> > > > had a case open with Oracle for 3.5 weeks now and they finally said
> > > > that the increase in kernel code has just maxed out our system. I
> > > > guess we were floating on the edge and the upgrade was just enough to
> > > > push us over.
>
> > > You know, this kind of bothers me. Oracle's solution is to pay them
> > > an additional $160K per year?!!! I know you probably don't (or
> > > shouldn't) pay sticker price, but it's a constant in terms of
> > > comparison discussions between customers.
>
> > > I also know they aren't obligated to tune your entire app, but telling
> > > you to buy more CPU's for the same application when the only thing
> > > (apparently) that has changed is their software?!!
>
> > > "We may be headed down a bad road here..."
>
> > Well, in our case we don't license by cpu with oracle, ibm on the
> > other hand we do. But yes, it is pretty ridiculous
>
> Still wish you had mentioned which process had the high cpu.
>
> jg
> --
> @home.com is bogus.
> "Your wife and your lawyer are drowning. You have to choose: Lunch
> or a movie?" - Mad Menhttp://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20070803/news_1b3lerach.html- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
sorry, I meant to answer.
There wasn't any one process. It was just a combination of multiple
active processes hitting the system. It got worse the more sessions
that were active.
Received on Fri Aug 03 2007 - 21:01:03 CDT
