Re: 10g with HACMP (no RAC)?

joel garry wrote:
> Apologies, my rant is with the management that created your issues.
> It appears to have all the red flags of a project doomed to failure.
> One time I signed on as a contractor to implement one installation of
> such a multi$M project, and wound up supporting the successful one
> that was hacked out by a couple of guys. The IBM box gathered dust in
> the warehouse.
>

Accepted.

This IBM "box" (actually a pair of frames) is unlikely to gather dust in the warehouse though; it has cost the client $$$ and is running a number of applications on umpteen LPARs.

For what it's worth, AIX would not be my first choice *nix as a platform for Oracle; I would much rather see it running on hpux, Solaris or Linux. But that isn't up to me.

But just to annoy Morgan, there is some advantage in running HACMP. The passive node can have almost nothing allocated to it in terms of memory and processors. These can be dynamically allocated in the event of the need for failover. Yes, we sacrifice the transparent failover which DataGuard can provide, but other components of the stack will lose uncommitted transactions, and/or require a minute or so of downtime, should they fail. There is no significant business advantage in having the Oracle layer any more available than the other components in the stack.

Palooka Received on Wed Sep 10 2008 - 17:06:38 CDT