Re: 3 or 4 nodes in a RAC?
- From: "Jonathan Lewis" <jonathan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "oracle-l-freelists" <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2011 16:18:11 +0100
As far as n-way communications are concerned it doesn't get worse than 3.
Node A (who wants a particular resource) asks
Node B (who is the master for the resource) to tell
Node C (who is currently exclusive owner of the resource) to pass it to
Node A
It doesn't matter how many nodes there are, the loop is always a triangle.
On the other hand, the fewer nodes you have the more likely you are to be the
master of a particular resource (no N-way negotiation), and the more likely
that the master also happens to be the owner if you aren't the master (better
chance of 2-way rather than 3 way).
Regards
Jonathan Lewis
http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Guillermo Alan Bort" <cicciuxdba@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "oracle-l-freelists" <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2011 3:51 PM
Subject: 3 or 4 nodes in a RAC?
List
This is a design question.... We are building a new RAC, we currently have
a 4 node RAC and we are upgrading the hardware and software and are
wondering whether to go with a 3 node RAC or a 4 node RAC. I've heard rumors
that 3node RAC perform better (we have no 4-way current gc waits, but there
are a lot of 3-way current waits)...
So, what I'm looking for is links or experiences regarding 3-way and
4-way RACs.
Thanks in advance
Alan.-
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1382 / Virus Database: 1511/3689 - Release Date: 06/08/11
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
