Re: 10g with HACMP (no RAC)?

From: Shakespeare <>
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 11:43:50 +0200
Message-ID: <48c6455a$0$194$>

<> schreef in bericht
> 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
> 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.
> --
> Sybrand Bakker
> Senior Oracle DBA


  • Do you own a car?
  • Did you ever have a flat tyre?
  • Did your mechanic tell you to take run-flat tyres?
  • Did he tell you they don't exist for your car?
  • Did he tell you to buy a BMW, Mini, Lexus, Audi or other car that supports run-flat tyres?
  • Did he tell you your car mightily sucks and should be replaced?

Or did he just repair your tyre?

Getting tyred.... Received on Tue Sep 09 2008 - 04:43:50 CDT

Original text of this message