RE: Oracle RAC cost justification?

From: Khemmanivanh, Somckit <somckit.khemmanivanh_at_weyerhaeuser.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 16:11:53 -0700
Message-ID: <65C0D8935651CB4D96E97CEFAC5A12B9444596@wafedixm10.corp.weyer.pri>

Well RAC is not the SAN right? RAC is HA for the Oracle Instance.  

If you're saying the total HA solution involves eliminating all SPOFs, I'd agree but cost is always a limiting factor in that regard...  

Thanks!  

---

From: Jared Still [mailto:jkstill_at_gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 4:04 PM
To: Khemmanivanh, Somckit
Cc: Vlado Barun; oracle-l_at_freelists.org
Subject: Re: Oracle RAC cost justification?

On 6/1/05, Khemmanivanh, Somckit <somckit.khemmanivanh_at_weyerhaeuser.com> wrote:

	Let's say we already have Service Guard in house. For new
	implementations should we go with MCSG or look at RAC? RAC is an
HA and
	scalability solution (MCSG is purely HA). I'm trying to get a

good         

RAC might be many things, but HA is not one of them.

The disk subsystem is a single point of failure: you only have one database.

--

Jared Still
Certifiable Oracle DBA and Part Time Perl Evangelist

--

http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l Received on Wed Jun 01 2005 - 19:16:51 CDT