My company made a decision that running the business continuously was and is
more important compared to the cost of RAC. We have all kind of SLA
agreements with end users and customers. Downtime exceeds x minutes and we
start loosing thousands of dollars per month. Oh and by the way, if you
really want RAC, you shouldn't be talking about the cost. Those two words
are not miscible.
Raj
On 6/3/05, Mercadante, Thomas F (LABOR) <Thomas.Mercadante_at_labor.state.ny.us>
wrote:
>
> Mark,
>
> You are correct. Everybody dances around the issue but fails to ask the
> clear-eyed question about the actual cost/benefit of using RAC. So far,
> I have not seen a clear-case for using it - since there are so many
> other ways to accomplish the business mission of the problem. The $
> cost of RAC is so high that it bumps up against actual hardware costs.
> And then add in the complexity factor of managing the software (want to
> talk about rolling Oracle upgrades in a RAC environment?) that the
> number of actual cases where RAC makes sense diminishes greatly.
>
> Tom
>
>
select standard_disclaimer from company_requirements where category =
'MANDATORY';
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Received on Sun Jun 05 2005 - 09:08:16 CDT
