Re: Recommended OS for Oracle

Seeing as everyone else is supplying their two cents here's mine: if your supporting the Oracle implementation then your as well picking an OS that you are familiar with *OR* that your sys admin team can support. To be honest I think I'd probably lose all my hair if I were a 100% Microsoft man and I ended up managing a Linux Oracle installation.

All the points made previously are valid:

   Familiarity and confidence with the OS    Cost (Linux is reliable and stable for very little expenditure - additionally, Intel based PC hardware is cheap compared to Sun).

   Fit for purpose - take the example above, why install a Linux server amongst my Win NT server farm? (Unless of course the situation demands it)

Well, there you go! Personally, I prefer Linux - if money is no object I'd probably pick Sun hardware and run Solaris but how often do you get an open budget to spend??? Last on my list is Microsoft - but I shan't rant about it here ...

Regards

"Brian Peasland" <oracle_dba_at_peasland.com> wrote in message news:3DC933E3.D65C32EC_at_peasland.com...
> While I don't disagree, there also comes a time when one's familiarity
> with a specific technology is one of the lowest concerns. Otherwise,
> we'd never have converted to Unix systems at all! We are IT
> professionals and as such, should make an effort to choose the "best"
> technology for the task, taking all constraints into consideration
> (familiarity is only one). If my boss tells me that we need to use mySQL
> for project XYZ, and mySQL makes sense to use, then my lack of
> familiarity doesn't mean squat. It might be cost that is a driving
> factor. That being said, we are an Oracle shop and we try to use Oracle
> at every opportunity, because we are familiar with it.
>
> Just my 3.14159265 cents worth,
> Brian
>
> > Niall makes an interesting point. I once read about a study of the
> > various GUI client-server development tools in the early 90's which also
> > included some more traditional tools e.g. COBOL, to find out if some
> > tools were more 'productive' than others. Turned out that the choice of
> > tool was almost insignificant compared to the degree of familiarity of
> > the programming team with their tool.
Received on Wed Nov 06 2002 - 13:55:11 CST