Re: Upgrade Plan

From: Ruud de Koter <>
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2009 19:40:34 +0100
Message-ID: <49737798$0$189$>

hpuxrac wrote:
> On Jan 17, 8:28 pm, Mladen Gogala <> wrote:
> snip
>>>  with 10g you can dump
>>> those expensive VCS licenses and use RAC/CRS only.
>> Actually, if they paid for them, VxFS/CFS with VCS is better
>> then ASM/CRS combination. Have in mind that ASM is not a fully
>> fledged file system and it's much harder to copy files to and from
>> ASM then it is to copy files to and from a file system. Also, VxFS
>> has caching (and cache coherence, of course) so you will not grow
>> old when waiting for scp to copy a file from a VxFS file system.
>> I wouldn't throw away those licenses, far from it.

> We eventually ditched RAC and are now completing a hpux to linux
> migration. When we were running rac on hpux service guard and raw
> worked well for us ( no veritas licenses ). At some point hp and so
> hpux started bundling in part of the veritas cluster software with
> service guard ... but that happened after we were headed in a
> different direction.
> With all the attention on the quality of oracle support *cough cough*
> there is no shortage of people wondering if it would not be better to
> avoid having your database vendor also provide your clustering
> software but of course oracle prevents that at the 10g level and
> above.

A very interesting post that rather stimulates my imagination. As I am to formulate a policy for our databases (central or decentrealized management), I am almost certain to run into the question "Why not set up a RAC implementation?" at some point. Would you please outline the sensitivities when choosing to do so (or more bluntly: would you share what brought you to ditch RAC)? I think that would be a voice from practice that could be very valuable for our decision making.

My sincere thanks in advance,

Ruud de Koter. Received on Sun Jan 18 2009 - 12:40:34 CST

Original text of this message