Re: native Oracle-port on Linux -- what would it take?

Bjorn Borud (borud_at_guardian.no) wrote:
: ["S V" <sv1_at_mindspring.com>]
: | 1. Linux has no logical volumes layer.
 

: what's the problem? I have worked on ONE site where they used logical
: volumes, but they would have done just as well without. this is a non
: issue.

Even more so - all competent DBA's I know of *hate* logical volumes. DBA's like to know exactly what disk spindle and what SCSI controller their data file is on, so they can make an reasoned guess at distributing IO load evenly over controllers/spindles. LVM structures (eg raid0 or raid5) destroy that.

However, the logical volume structure of HPUX and Solaris ODS isn't much more (if any more!) than the metadisk driver currently in Linux.

: | 3. Linux has no support for raw devices - hence NO even remote possibility
: | to run Oracle Parallel Server.
 

: I have yet to desire raw devices for using Oracle and I certainly have
: never needed to run Oracle Parallel server. if I would ever need to
: run it I would certainly not do it on a PC.

Emphasised! If you need OPS, then you are not going to go anywhere near a PC server. You're talking HPUX Kclass servers with MC/Serviceguard or Solaris E3000's with SSAs at a minimum.

: | 4. Linux networking is flaky at best.
 

: uh, compared to what? would you mind explaining to me how you got

Linux networking is very good actually. Perhaps SV is thinking of the 0.99pl12 kernel :-)

: | 5. Linux OS block size is what? 512 bytes? It would make even MS
: | Access laugh and puke steam.
 

: uh, what block size would that be? if you're talking about the file

Err, this is also irrelevant since database systems like Oracle have tuning features to allow block pre-fetch, multi-block fetchs etc in one IO operation.

: | 6. Linux SMP is rudimentary and flaky at best.
 

: that might be true, but still, they ported Oracle to NT and last time
: I checked Linux scaled better across 2 CPUs than NT.

Linux 2.0 SMP isn't too hot (lots of mutex locking) but works. 2.1 SMP is a lot better and faster.

: | 7. The same for multithreading.
 

: from what I understand Linux multithreading is different from for
: example Solaris. I'm told (by people who are intimately familiar

Err, Oracle didn't even properly do Multi-threading until 7.3.3, and doesn't really take full advantage of it until version 8.0.3. Indeed, for a lot of applications, the MTS options _SLOW_DOWN_ the database on HPUX and Solaris systems. Your requirements have to be quite specialised to benefit from enabling MTS in Oracle. [ This is what my DBA told me after coming back from the Oracle Performance Tuning course, upon which he promptly turned off the MTS options! ]

: | In fact porting Oracle to Linux would require Oracle to write its
: | own Linux almost from scratch.
 

: you are most absolutely wrong.

Yup!

: | ==> I don't see much (or rather _any) prospects for seeing Oracle on
: | Linux.
 

: perhaps it's time for you to take a closer look at Linux as well as
: other systems that Oracle has been ported to before you jump to any

Well, SV is right, but for the wrong reasons. Oracle rarely jumps at things unless they see $$$$$$$

-- 
                            Stephen Harris
             sweh@spuddy.mew.co.uk   http://www.spuddy.org/

      The truth is the truth, and opinion just opinion.  But what is what?
  * Meeeeow ! Call  Spud the Cat on > 01268 515441 < for free Usenet access *