Re: Oracle on NT...Why Not?

midnite_at_sojourn1.sojourn.com (Thomas Remisoski) writes:
> Hi,
>
> My company has proposed an NT/Oracle solution to a client. We are meeting
> some resistance from the IS staff. Typical comments are "It's just not
> there yet" or "NT is not stable enough to maintain 24x7 uptime". They
> are evaluating Unix instead. This is no problem for us but we're
> wondering whether we should recommend NT/Oracle solutions in the future.
>
> What do you think? Is NT "there" yet? Does anyone have great success or
> failure to report with this architecture?
>
> Thanks in Advance,
> Tom Remisoski

Tom,

Of course, NT is there. When it seems to run fine, occasionally it does provide problems which are difficult to sort out, because they seem to be dependent on the interaction between NT and Oracle (and both companies blaming each other for the bug) There are several reasons why you should at least consider Unix: -Although the user interface of Unix is not really user friendly, Unix itself should be considered a stale, well-tested robust OS with minimal overhead (which can't be said of NT) -One serious disadvantage of NT is that it has no serious batch facilities that can compare to Unix Cron. There is a batch like facility in Oracle itself, apparently this is no serious alternative for database wide maintenance jobs, like backup and reindexing. -Availability of the latest version of Oracle for NT seems to be much much later compared to Unix. While Oracle 7.2 was announced in the US already in July 95, the NT "port" was available in January 96, and it still seems not to contain the latest version of every product.

Regards,

Sybrand Bakker
Senior IS Analyst
Bentley Systems Europe Received on Fri Mar 08 1996 - 00:00:00 CET