| 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: Virtual RAC on Solaris E15k
I believe it is more accurate to state that depending on the nature of the
problem, some nodes may continue running when another node fails. I'm not
aware of a good study comparing failure modes and the likelihood of one node
failure affecting the continued operation of other nodes. Clearly the intent
of proper domain construction includes minimizing the chances that the crash
of one node will affect other nodes.
good luck!
mwf
-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org]On Behalf Of Mark Moynahan
Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2004 6:21 PM
To: 'oracle-l_at_freelists.org'
Subject: RE: Virtual RAC on Solaris E15k
True, if one node goes down the other nodes will not be affected.
What has been proposed is that we create a domain(node) for each system board. Then build a RAC system amongst the multiple domains. That way there if one board fails, thus making a domain fail, the RAC system would continue working.
Currently, we have a dedicated 9i db running on one domain. The domain has multiple boards. If one of the boards fail the DB goes down. Management wants to get away from having this situation occur.
Cheers!
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org]On Behalf Of Khedr, Waleed
Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2004 2:18 PM
To: oracle-l_at_freelists.org
Subject: RE: Virtual RAC on Solaris E15k
Redundancy in e15K is built in such way that after domain'ing the machine, each node is completely self sufficient.
Problem in one node is isolated from the other node.
Read about "Dynamic System Domains"
Regards,
Waleed
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Moynahan [mailto:Mark.Moynahan_at_apollogrp.edu]
Sent: Friday, June 11, 2004 3:38 PM
To: 'oracle-l_at_freelists.org'
Subject: Virtual RAC on Solaris E15k
Management has come to our team and asked about putting a 9i RAC on a
single
e15K. We completed their request by building a two node cluster on a
single
e15k. The problem is that management thinks this will buy them
redundancy.
When management was asked 'How would RAC on e15k provide redundancy if
the
e15k goes down?' their rebuttal was 'The e15k rarely ever goes down and
there needs to be db redundancy in relation to the e15k hardware.' This
doesn't make sense to me. Why bother with virtual RAC when there is
still a
single point of failure? The added complexity of RAC doesn't provide any
real benefits. Can anyone argue in favor of putting virtual RAC on an
e15k?
Wouldn't a logical standby be a better option?
Thanks,
Mark
FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.htmlput 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request_at_freelists.org
FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.htmlput 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request_at_freelists.org
 |
 |