Re: Where is Oracle’s Grid ?

Daniel Morgan <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote in message news:<1072903741.993345_at_yasure>...
> Joel Garry wrote:
>
> > Daniel Morgan <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote in message news:<1072479383.579753_at_yasure>...
> >
> >>Joel Garry wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>>RAC properly implemented means not having to purchase expensive hardware.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Actually I don't understand. And I do need to explain to people why,
> >>>so if there is a good reference, let me know. As it is, I cannot
> >>>explain to people who don't see a need to scale why they should bother
> >>>with a small Oracle system, which requires multiple boxes. Say, 50
> >>>users doing ordinary business stuff, is small.
> >>>
> >>>jg
> >>>--
> >>>@home.com is bogus.
> >>>http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/uniontrib/fri/business/news_1b19spam.html
> >>
> >>Get a copy of Mike Ault's book ORacle9i RAC.
> >>
> >>Or contact the Puget Sound Oracle Users Group about the next RAC class.
> >
> >
> > Why should I bother? Read Mogen's Select article
> > http://www.ioug.org/client_files/tech/12231.pdf about why you don't
> > need RAC. And grid: http://www.ioug.org/tech/10g.cfm says "Oracle
> > defines grid computing as the coordinated use of many small servers
> > acting as one computer." How about one small server acting as one
> > computer? I'd expect it's difficult to run 10G (remember, that term
> > now includes AS) on one production computer. Oracle came up with a
> > small system pricing for the db, but decided there isn't any market
> > for AS in the same way. So all the scaling talk is for scaling _up_.
> > Scaling from small can't happen. Now you need to upgrade your
> > network...
> >
> > jg
> > --
> > @home.com is bogus.
> > http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,4149,1424814,00.asp
>
> 10g runs just fine on a PIII W2K SP4 machine with 512MB RAM. How much
> smaller can you get?

I simply don't believe all three 10G tiers will run on such a machine, since the two tiers that I bet you haven't included are documented to require 512M each. And my experience with previous versions has been that the minimum is optimistic, at best.

>
> And Mogen's article? Available only to IOUG members so most can't read
> it ... and I am not impressed: By his article that is.

Fair enough. But I'd still like to know what is not impressive.

>
> How Oracle defines the word is unimportant. What I've seen it do? Very
> important.

jg

--
"As designers we have to be the keepers of the identity. I see my job
as bringing people together to stay apart." - Peter Horbury