JEDIDIAH wrote:
> On 2004-10-20, DA Morgan <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote:
>
>>Mark Clark wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 21:14:38 -0700, DA Morgan
>>><damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Praveen wrote:
>
> [deletia]
>
>>>Worth considering the limitations of RAC too -- range etc.. That said
>>>h/w clustering and RAC are often complimentary in large scale
>>>deployments where they each provide a solution to certain
>>>problems/challenges. Certainly for large projects the aquisition
>>>costs are rarely a major factor for a blue chip.
>>>
>>>
>>>Mark
>>>http://www.linxcel.co.uk
>>
>>What limitation? In Japan they ran a 10g RAC cluster with 128 nodes.
>>Do you think you can find an SMP machine that large?
>
>
> Depending on the size of the indivual nodes, SGI probably makes
> such a machine already.
>
> Although, there is a difference between running and running well. The
> biggest production deployment I've ever heard of was 30 nodes. However, that's
> been awhile.
I believe it was 128 nodes with 4 CPU Dells making 256 CPUs and that it
scaled at 80% of theoretical. Mark Townsend might wish to weigh in with
the details if he can make them public. I noticed an Oracle publication
not too long ago list 64 nodes which is 1/2 of what I know was proven.
This is not surprising as I have never had a RAC fail-over as slow as
what Oracle guarantees either. They seem to be reasonably cautious in
what they claim: And reasonably so.
--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
Received on Mon Oct 25 2004 - 23:19:32 CDT
