Re: How stable is Oracle 11i?

From: Palooka <>
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2009 02:33:41 +0100
Message-ID: <VxbEl.13296$Rh1.8097_at_newsfe10.ams2>

Michael Austin wrote:
> wrote:

>> On Apr 11, 12:12 am, wrote:
>>> I have some Oracle 9i based databases. These database are used for
>>> critical production systems, We are looking to upgrade the databases
>>> to newer version of Orcale. I am wondering whether I can upgrade them
>>> to 11g (instead of Oracle 10.2.0.x), I find Oracle 11g has lots of
>>> nice features, I however want to make sure I do not run into problems
>>> if I use Oracle11g since our databases are critical to business.
>>> I am using HP UNIX 11i.
>> Well I would be changing my cdos name from hpuxrac to linux11g if I
>> knew how to do that. We are in the process of completing a migration
>> from hpux to 11g for all of my systems ... days to completion is
>> measured in weeks not months.
>> Certainly you have to test. Certainly 11.2 is just around the corner
>> relatively speaking.
>> Except for one really flaky thing with a recover database ( check for
>> my recent posts if you wish ) that does have a documented bypass I
>> have not seen any show stoppers on ... your mileage may vary.
>> The performance on 11g on linux OEL 5.x on fairly generic servers is
>> pretty astonishing. ( Well quad core intel xeon's ). Looks like
>> nehalem offers some pretty incredible upgrade paths .... who needs rac
>> anyway?
>> Give me an email back if you want a phone call etc.
>> Good luck!
> Given some of the comments here about OEL 5.x, I am not sure I would 
> have dumped HPUX and jump to commodity boxes just yet... I am not so 
> much worried about speed as I am stability in the platform. So far, I 
> still see Linux as a "toy" OS not yet ready for prime time. You may 
> disagree and that is okay. It may be right for your application.  I am, 
> at this point, not willing to bet my uptime numbers on it :)
I concur. For serious work I'll go with a Superdome, or even an IBM p-series.

Palooka Received on Sat Apr 11 2009 - 20:33:41 CDT

Original text of this message