| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
 |
 | |||
| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
|
| |||
Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> RE: 9i RAC or 10g RAC ?
Since cost is at the heart of this venture you might want to consider =
the cost of RAC licensing, this might affect your bottom line. On the =
bright side if you're Solaris servers have 750 or 900 MHz processors you =
might be able to get by with 2 4-way Intel servers, considering your =
processors might be 2.8GHz.
As to 9i vs 10g, I would be concerned at this point with reliablity of = 10g until it is proven. Or, you could be nice and go through the pain = of proving it for the rest of us and let us know how it goes.
As to the reason for RAC, in my opinion the true benefit of RAC is = scalability. You get the best performance from a single instance, = redundancy with DataGuard, and scalability with RAC. The ability to = grow your system capacity by adding a node is great, although be careful = in budgeting for this, the hardware may be cheap but RAC is not.
Kenny
-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org]On Behalf Of Browett, Darren
Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2004 10:39 AM
To: oracle-l_at_freelists.org
Subject: RE: 9i RAC or 10g RAC ?
>From my experience, RAC performance is based on how well your
inter-connect can perform.=3D20
If it cannot handle the traffic then RAC performance will suffer.
Granted I had more then one database running on the servers, and the
servers
were older slower systems.
I remember somebody commenting on this list, if you want high
performance, go single
instance, if you want high availability, then go RAC.
Darren
-----Original Message-----
From: Singh, Ratnesh (GEI, GEFA, Contractor)
[mailto:Ratnesh.Singh_at_ge.com]=3D20
Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 2:39 PM
To: oracle-l_at_freelists.org
Subject: RE: 9i RAC or 10g RAC ?
Better Performance is my main concern.=3D3D20
We intend to move our production database, which is currently 150 gig =
=3D
=3D3D
and is expected to grow to 500 gig in a year.
Business case for RAC is primarily $$ because Management wants to move =
=3D
=3D3D
all Solaris boxes to Redhat Linux.
Our current Solaris box is 12cpu, and target is 3 or 4 4-cpu linux boxes
=3D3D
cluster running RAC.
That also would be our first step towards High Availability.
thanks & regards
ratnesh=3D3D20
-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org]On Behalf Of Mladen Gogala
Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 5:26 PM
To: oracle-l_at_freelists.org
Subject: Re: 9i RAC or 10g RAC ?
What do you consider advantage? What is your business case for RAC? What do you plan to do with RAC? Stability of RAC on Linux is, from all that I hear, very good, for both versions.=3D3D20
On 05/10/2004 05:20:04 PM, "Singh, Ratnesh (GEI, GEFA, Contractor)" =
=3D3D
wrote:
> Does 10g rac have significant improvements or new features as compared
=3D3D
=3D3D3D
> to 9i rac ?
> Is 10g rac more stable than 9i rac ?=3D3D3D20
--=3D3D20
Mladen Gogala
Oracle DBA
Note:
This message is for the named person's use only. It may contain =3D3D
confidential, proprietary or legally privileged information. No =3D3D
confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission.
=3D3D
If you receive this message in error, please immediately delete it and =
=3D
=3D3D
all copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it and =
=3D3D
notify the sender. You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose,
=3D3D
distribute, print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the =
=3D
=3D3D
intended recipient. Wang Trading LLC and any of its subsidiaries each =
=3D
=3D3D
reserve the right to monitor all e-mail communications through its =3D3D
networks.
Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender,
=3D3D
except where the message states otherwise and the sender is authorized =
=3D
=3D3D
to state them to be the views of any such entity.
-- Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/ FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request_at_freelists.org put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line. -- Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/ FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request_at_freelists.org put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line. -- Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/ FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request_at_freelists.org put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line. -- Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/ FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html -----------------------------------------------------------------Received on Tue May 11 2004 - 10:37:27 CDT
 |
 |