Re: Oracle 9iR2 32bit on windows 2003 server 64bit

From: marco <>
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2008 13:35:46 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <>

On 8 Giu, 19:41, "gym dot scuba dot kennedy at gmail" <> wrote:
> "marco" <> wrote in message
> On 8 Giu, 18:34, "" <> wrote:
> > "marco" <> wrote in message
> >
> > What is the "reasoning"? (Is it some misguided conception that things will
> > run faster?) Oracle won't use the extra memory in the machine. It can't
> > address it. If Oracle does not support the configuration what is the
> > client
> > going to do when they call support and Oracle says "We don't support that
> > combination. Please install into a supported configuration and then we
> > will
> > support you." I hope they aren't niave enough to think that 1. Oracle
> > won't
> > say that. 2. They can brow beat the Support Tech/manager etc. into giving
> > them support anyway. 3. They won't ever have to call support. Isn't their
> > data important to them?
> > Jim
> Firstly let me say that I totally agree with you Jim.
> The reason for the requirement is that oracle will run in a cluster.
> The application has been written for Oracle 9i.
> In the same cluster will run another software that needs win 2003 64
> bit, so the
> solution, in my opinion could be to upgrade the application to 10 g or
> to install
> it in a different cluster.
> But, as you can guess, both the solutions aren't up to me, as I act as
> consultant, I only can
> give advices, but cannot take decisions by myself.
> M.
> Ironic.  So they want to run in a cluster presumably for High Availability
> (good idea) but they want to use an unsupported configuration.  10G is not
> the new kid on the block so any excuse that it is a first release product
> won't wash.  One method we use in our group when stupid choice is being made
> is to have the person making the choice do the following:
> 1. In front of the group while repeating the"sub-optimal"decision out loud
> hold their right hand up.
> 2. Repeat the "sub-optimal" decision statement (and concequences) slowly,
> loudly and one time for each finger on their right hand.
> 3. If they still agree to go forward then go forward.
> It is amazing what it does.  (sounds stupid to do it, but it sounds even
> stupider to say the "sub-optimal"decision out loud in front of everyone even
> if they agree with the course of action.
> I am going to guess here that it is an off the shelf application and that
> the application's vendor is stating the Oracle version requirement.  (Could
> be that the vendor hasn't upgraded their queries from rule based to cost
> based and there isn't a rule based optimizer in 10G.  The queries would
> probably run fine, but again it is a CYA move.)  If it is an application
> vendor's requirement ot run Oracle 9 then I would point out there is an
> implicit requirement to run Oracle on a supported platform.  The vendor
> isn't going to support Oracle running on an unsupported configuration any
> more than Oracle would.
> Why not go with RAC? (or data guard) I bet the vendor's application is not
> certified for RAC.  RAC is a great amplifier of bad code.  So if the
> application does not use bind variables etc.  RAC would only make it worse.
> Jim

probably I'm going OT, but the discussion seems interesting. Let me explain a typical Italian scenario:

customer A needs two software, let's say software 1 and s/w 2, sold by vendor 1 and vendor 2.
He don't know anything about hardware solutions, software requirements,
compatible problems...he only know that he needs s/w 1 and 2. He asks to its IT partner, company B, to provide an ALL IN ONE offer: h/w, SAN (yes...SAN), s/w, Db server, installation, configuration, training.

Well, company B contacts vendor 1 and 2 to have their requirements. In this case these has been
Oracle 9i and windows 2003 server 64 bit (why?? I don't know!).

Company B does not have internally all skills required to install hardware, SAN, Oracle, windows cluster and so on, so contacts lots of external consultants that DO the jobs. I'm one of these consultants.
Could you figure out how difficult is to manage situations like this?

I spent the last one hours and half at phone, trying to explain to company A managers
that should be better to have a conference call tomorrow, with both vendor 1 and vendor 2
to find a cross solution.

I didn't considered RAC mainly because I don't know the application that will
run at all, so I cannot give advices in this direction. Of course I agree with you
regarding all your considerations......

M. Received on Sun Jun 08 2008 - 15:35:46 CDT

Original text of this message