Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid |
Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> RE: Oracle Standard Edition & RAC
I agree.
I have a p690 w/10CPU's for production.
P5nn for development.
These machines scream and just keep going. I won the argument *against* RAC here when I told the group at a meeting that the server had been up for 275 days straight. I asked "What more do you expect to get from RAC?".
I won.
-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org [mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org] On Behalf Of Laimutis Nedzinskas
Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 12:02 PM
To: oracle-l_at_freelists.org
Subject: RE: Oracle Standard Edition & RAC
I second that. RACīs job should be done by the hardware, it is not a software job. In the situation when multy-core systems are entering the market, CPU clock speed seems to be reaching some limits - shouldnīt we expect multy-CPU boxes to become a commodity?
BTW: we took 16CPU P5nn route. It just works.
-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org [mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org] On Behalf Of Mladen Gogala
Limited high availability, approximately equal to the one provided by cheap RAC configurations can usually be provided by NUMA technologies.
What people don't understand is that Altix, Superdome or P595 can provide the same or higher level of uptime as clustered Dell boxes with much, much better and more predictable performance.
Unfortunately, NUMA is not such a buzzword as RAC.
Fyrirvari/Disclaimer
http://www.landsbanki.is/disclaimer
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Received on Fri Jan 05 2007 - 12:14:43 CST