| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
 |
 | |||
| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
|
| |||
Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> RE: (Win2K vs NT4) / RE: OT RE: Async I/O on Windows
No
problem..
<FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----From: root_at_fatcity.com
[mailto:root_at_fatcity.com]On Behalf Of Mohan, RossSent:
Tuesday, February 06, 2001 03:51To: Multiple recipients of list
ORACLE-LSubject: RE: (Win2K vs NT4) / RE: OT RE: Async I/O on
Windows
Thanks for the extended mail on your direct experience.
Much better than CNET, I guess we can all agree?
-----Original Message----- From: Mark
Leith [<A
href="mailto:mark_at_cool-tools.co.uk">mailto:mark_at_cool-tools.co.uk]
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 8:46 AM <FONT
size=2>To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <FONT
size=2>Subject: RE: (Win2K vs NT4) / RE: OT RE: Async I/O on Windows
Ep,
I have 8i running concurrently on a Win2k system with SS7, and
have to say that it still runs like a dream. Like I
mentioned earlier Oracle is still my favourite
databeast, but there are a few things that still cough and <FONT
size=2>splutter - like OEM for example. The Java side of things can be a
little painful, but as I understand it is mostly on
all platforms, as Oracle still haven't got it just
right - though 9i again is "supposed" to be a great <FONT
size=2>improvement on how the JVM is managed.
Win2K has better service management - unless I didn't notice
under NT - where if a service fails, you can first try
and restart the service, if that fails, you can run a
file - whatever it may be - and if THAT fails you can <FONT
size=2>reboot the machine automatically, and cross your fingers that the
service starts properly with spewing nasty error
messages at you.
I have been using Win2k for around 4 months now and have NEVER
seen a BSOD (Blue Screen of Death), I reboot quite
often - granted - but that is only because LookOut
keep trying to dial my mail server, gets it knickers in a <FONT
size=2>twist, hangs, gives me a mail delivery error, trys again, then comes
back telling me the phone entry it already being
dialed!! So because I can't live without my Lyris
"Family" I have to reboot the bloody thing. I have only <FONT
size=2>once had to reboot when installing new software, and that was because
the dongle wasn't recognized properly.
All in all Win2K is far and above NT 4 in my view. File
management is handled a lot better, you can have
online network drives, even if the network machine is
down.. IIS is OK but I can't see a business need for it <FONT
size=2>though..
Oh, and they have even added the lovely little desktops themes
available with Windows 98, but not NT.. Now, I have to
say, this little feature is the one that sold it for
me :)
Give it a try Eric, if you are used to NT, you may be
pleasantly suprised..
Regards
Mark
P.S Win2K was Built on NT Technology according to the new
splash screen.. It can only improve right? Right?
Micrslop? hardy har har har...
-----Original Message----- <FONT
size=2>Pierce Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001
07:06 To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Ross & Mark, There are no major
performance concerns here (and we get Oracle "free"
{system wide educational site license} - unlike
MS/SQL), so what I want to know is: does Oracle8 <FONT
size=2>generally work well on Windows 2000 server (compared to
running it on NT4)? We will be running on this
hardware: IBM Netfinity5100 w/ RAID (dedicated Oracle
server, w/ web server on same box, if
possible).
My assumption is that Win2k/Oracle8 is "ok". Are there
any horror stories out there about running Oracle8 on
Win2K where running on NT4 would have been
better?
thanks! ep
On 5 Feb 2001, at 9:25, Mark Leith wrote:
Date sent:
Mon, 05 Feb 2001 09:25:25
-0800 <FONT
size=2>To:
Multiple recipients of list
ORACLE-L <ORACLE-L_at_fatcity.com>
> RE: Async I/O on WindowsWOOOOHOOOOOOO a SQLServer vs.
Oracle debate again!!
...
 |
 |