Re: 10g RAC design options

DA Morgan wrote:
>
> ORA600 wrote:
>
> > I am not convinced that RAC scales on Linux as much as it does on other
> > UNIX flavours.
>
> Meaning that when Oracle itself used a fork lift to push its big Sun
> boxes out into the parking lot you thought to yourself? Gee I wonder
> if they know what they're doing?
>
> Last year, for a division of Boeing I took their best Sun boxes and
> stacked them up against a RAC cluster built from 2 CPU boxes running
> RHEL. The Sun boxes were retired to Boeing Surplus within 60 days.
>
> > Adding nodes is not the solution for scaling (not
> > always). A box must be able to scale vertically (adding CPUs, memory,
> > etc.)
>
> Sorry but this is just ridiculous. You have seemingly missed the entire
> concept behind RAC, the entire economic and performance justification
> of RAC, every benchmark published, and apparently think Oracle,
> Amazon.com, and numerous other organizations know less than you do: I'm
> incredulous.
>
> > Patching is not an issue with 10g RAC, it can be done online.
>
> This is NOT always true. Where did you get this information?
> --
> Daniel A. Morgan
> http://www.psoug.org
> damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
> (replace x with u to respond)

True, but they also forklifted those Sun boxes back *into* the building to run their global Apps instance...

You'll hear Larry always talking about "lots of Linux boxes" ... but they didn't do that for their own mega Apps database. They went 4 x Sun....hmmmm

-- 
Connor McDonald
Co-author: "Mastering Oracle PL/SQL - Practical Solutions"
Co-author: "Oracle Insight - Tales of the OakTable"

web: http://www.oracledba.co.uk
web: http://www.oaktable.net
email: connor_mcdonald_at_yahoo.com


"Semper in excremento, sole profundum qui variat."

------------------------------------------------------------