[HPADM] RE: Input About Oracle RAC
- From: "Romeo Ninov" <rninov@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 22:00:33 +0200
On Oracle RAC you get high-availability, load balancing, especially if you
use ASM to manage the storage. But the main problem is VERY hard management
of more then 3 servers, but this is duty of DBA, not sysadmin. Balancing of
load is almost nightmare :-). And do not use NAS for shared storage (via NFS
mounts) but SAN
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Regards: Romeo Ninov
http://rninov.host-bg.info
Freedom, Sancho.....
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
From: hpux-admin-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:hpux-admin-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Steven Illgen
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2008 9:23 PM
To: hpux-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [HPADM] Input About Oracle RAC
This is sort of off-topic, but there I am engaged in discussions about the
pros and cons of installing and supporting Oracle RAC as a replacement
architecture to the standard database deployments on single servers.
Does anyone on this list have experience with configuring and installing
Oracle RAC in an HP-UX and/or Linux environment? If so, what are your
opinions regarding this? Have you seen any performance improvements, etc.?
Is there a benefit with large (> 1TB) database instances?
Thanks, and I will summarize.
Steve Illgen
Sr. IT Systems Administrator, UNIX
Dollar General Corporation
sillgen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Follow-Ups:
- [HPADM] RE: RE: Input About Oracle RAC
- From: Magnus Andersen
- [HPADM] RE: RE: Input About Oracle RAC
- References:
- [HPADM] Input About Oracle RAC
- From: Steven Illgen
- [HPADM] Input About Oracle RAC
- Prev by Date: [HPADM] Input About Oracle RAC
- Next by Date: [HPADM] RE: RE: Input About Oracle RAC
- Previous by thread: [HPADM] Input About Oracle RAC
- Next by thread: [HPADM] RE: RE: Input About Oracle RAC
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|