Re: Appliances
Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 10:44:19 +1200
Message-ID: <CANz7uMabPJrz6wacojKaT2GXOJ+Q4Gh8dPbDhdzrMsgDG+Yg1A_at_mail.gmail.com>
Hi Howard
Not sure what "safe" means, but...
we evaluated ODA last year, but in our case (reluctantly) turned it down
because:
- only 11.2 was available. We have several critical legacy systems which
use 9.2, 10.2 so that was a showstopper.
- disk was not expandable at that point. I understand that's been
addressed via NFS now.
It was nice that you could run non-RAC EE and license some fraction of the available cores. Our old db server has license for 4 "processors" (ie 8 cores) and it would be difficult to get budget for more. And I would take the performance profile of a recent Intel Xeon over a T4 any day :)
For a use case where you don't mind giving Oracle access to the server and have a set of databases that can all run on 11.2 and be patched simultaneously, it would make sense.
At least, this was how we understood it after liaising with the pre-sales guys.
cheers-
jeff
On 15 May 2013 02:19, Howard Latham <howard.latham_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> We have spoken to Oracle sales after a long holiday and they are steering
> us hard toward Oracle Appliances to reduce the multiple core's cost. Are we
> safe with that route?
> Howard A. Latham
>
>
> --
> http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
>
>
-- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-lReceived on Wed May 15 2013 - 00:44:19 CEST