Keg wrote:
> Daniel Morgan <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote in message news:<1097721531.411585_at_yasure>...
>
>>Hans Forbrich wrote:
>>
>>
>>>ty wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hi All
>>>>We have decided on the following setup for our database server
>>>>
>>>>Oracle 9i + RAC
>>>>Redhat linux (AS)
>>>>Netapp filer (for shared storage).
>>>>
>>>>Any ideas\suggestions??go for 64bit cpu??
>>>>btw,cost effectiveness is NOT a major fector-we look for 1.reliability
>>>>2.performance.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>In addition to what might be said here - get your possible vendors to
>>>provide references. And follow up on the references.
>>>
>>>Regardless of what we might tell you, your relationship with your hardware
>>>vendor is one of the more critical items.
>>>
>>>Go for 64-bit if that's what you need - big memory, big files, etc.
>>
>>If RedHat Linux you are going with 32bit CPU so the question is moot.
>>
>>If you want to learn how to install, configure and manage this
>>configuration contact Jack Cline, Chairman of the Puget Sound Oracle
>>Users Group.
>>
>>NetApp is an excellent choice. Dell or HP/Compaq good too. The most
>>important consideration is the NIC cards. Make sure the vendor certifies
>>that the NIC cards will work with this configuration.
>>
>>For example ... NetGear 311s do ... NetGear 312s do not.
>
>
>
> You don't want a NetApp for your storage, that is NFS (unless they
> have changed recently)
>
> -rhugga
Where have you been for the last 3 years? In a cave in the Antarctic?
Oracle Corp. itself runs on nothing but NetApp for their Oracle.
The division of Boeing where I consult has moved entirely to NFS mounted
NetApp.
Starbucks runs Oracle on NetApp
and I could name many many more.
Come on out of the cave, update your skills, and have a latte'.
--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
Received on Thu Oct 14 2004 - 22:04:09 CDT
