Re: 10g with HACMP (no RAC)?

From: Palooka <>
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 23:51:32 +0100
Message-ID: <y%hxk.373212$D01.83666@newsfe17.ams2> wrote:
> On Mon, 08 Sep 2008 21:19:11 +0100, Palooka <>
> wrote:

>> Besides which, there are actually some reasons not 
>> to go with RAC. Firstly, the application vendor doesn't actually support 
>> it. 

> That would be the perfect reason to replace the application.
> RAC is transparent to the application.
> If a vendor states
> 'We don't support RAC'
> this likely means 'My application is unscalable and it mightily sucks'
> Note most application vendors still promote the 'database independent'
> fairy tale, and a whole lot of so-called DBAs rather manage a mess and
> get fired in the end, than to set up things professionally.
> You seem to be no exception to this rule.
> Your case is lost, yet you continue to defend it.
> You will notice your case is lost SOON. Let's only pray Herr Weber is
> there to help you out.

So the client decides on an application, and we are brought in as integrators for a fee of around 2m. We are supposed to turn this down, are we, because the client may not have made the best choice?

As I said, some of us live in the real world.

Palooka Received on Mon Sep 08 2008 - 17:51:32 CDT

Original text of this message