GreyBeard wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 19:58:13 +0100, Frank van Bortel wrote:
>
>
>>Ah - yes. Uptime (more 9's), not performance (although I could
>>imagine getting thru to one of twelve OID servers may be faster
>>than getting thru to that one.)
>
>
> Please 'splain more.
>
> Since database can be RAC'd, you get serious uptime from OiD that doesn't
> need dup'd big servers. Add the fact that OiD servers can then go on
> small boxes scattered where-ever and talk to the RAC'd data store via
> SQLNet, and these can then be load balanced thru h/w, etc. ... I don't
> follow your comment.
>
> /FGB
Well - you described it perfectly for someone who doesn't
follow. :)
I just left out RAC in my mental picture (which I should have
drawn to the audience): kinda like HTTP server farms: all small
boxes doing the same (and OiD is not a large database!), h/w load
balancing - just the picture you describe (without RAC)
My experience is with OiD (the 8i version), though. Sniffed 9i,
but got bitten by the Wallet manager.
--
Regards,
Frank van Bortel
Received on Thu Mar 17 2005 - 02:04:33 CST
