Re: Oracle on Linux vs NT

We're using Oracle on a Dell PowerEdge 2300 with 256MB of RAM and three AMI MegaRaid controllers. We've got 234GB of disks, though much of that is in a RAID 1 config, and part of it is dedicated to temp tables, RBS, etc. Our largest table is about 200 million records of ~150 bytes each, and I can do a full table scan in a couple of hours. Index scans are very fast. I am sure that NT on the same machine would deliver significantly less performance (the same machine use to support a smaller version of the db on NT/SQL Server 6.5, though that's no comparison).

This is not a production db -- it takes a nightly bulk insert of production data -- but it's only gone down when I've added new drives.

My only words of warning:

1.) Use the 2.2 kernel -- 2.0's scsi code caused some crashes when I was dealing with multiple SCSI controllers. 2.) Watch out for the glibc problem when installing. 3.) Get Oracle Enterprise Edition -- you'll need to partition your large tables and indexes.
4.) Linux has a 2GB file size limitation, which presents a big problem for export-based backups (but not cold backups). If you need to export more than 2GB of data, there are ways of exporting to a named pipe and splitting it up. See previous posts for more info.

Good luck.

Erik Diehn
erikd_at_nospamm.cometsystems.com - nospamm

Dave Zuzga wrote:
>
> Does anyone have any recommendations on which OS to use for an Oracle DB
> running on an Intel 4 Processor Xeon machine? It has 1GB RAM, a DPT
> RAID Controller, and 95 GB of disks.
>
> I'd like to hear the pros/cons of using Linux vs NT for an Oracle
> server.
>
> Respond here or via email to dzuzga_at_isdinc.com
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dave Zuzga
Received on Fri Sep 03 1999 - 12:06:32 CDT