Re: 2xSMP vs RAC for failover - was Re: informix market share

On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 08:44:54 -0800, DA Morgan <damorgan_at_psoug.org> wrote:

>Serge Rielau wrote:
>> DA Morgan wrote:
>>
>>> Serge Rielau wrote:
>>>
>>>> *chuckle*And there always will be because SMP scales better than RAC
>>>> (more CPUs needed) and RAC is cited as a major contributer to Linux
>>>> licenses... it ain't free.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Of course if you also want transparent failover with that big SMP box
>>> you get to buy at least one more of them.
>>
>> Of course. But that wou;d be the add Orcale doen't show.
>
>Actually that IS the Oracle marketing message. Stop buying big,
>expensive, SMP boxes. Instead buy low cost resilient hardware. Build
>the equivalent of those expensive boat-anchors from components and
>gain not just equivalent processing power and lower cost but, and a
>most important ... but ... also gain transparent failover.
>
>>> From my experience only a small percentage of Oracle customers buy RAC
>>> for scalability. The vast majority for transparent failover.
>>
>> That matches what I hear. Not what Oracle says of course (that ad
>> again)....
>
>Any technologist that listens to marketing messages and makes the
>assumption that they are the definitive word is a fool. I would hope one
>does not spend a decade in this industry only to swoon over the
>carefully crafted verbiage of some spin doctor.
>

Unfortunately, it's not the techies who listen to marketing messages.

JWC Received on Thu Dec 01 2005 - 20:31:37 CST