RE: Oracle RAC cost justification?
- From: "Khemmanivanh, Somckit" <somckit.khemmanivanh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "Jared Still" <jkstill@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 16:11:53 -0700
Well RAC is not the SAN right? RAC is HA for the Oracle Instance.
If you're saying the total HA solution involves eliminating all SPOFs,
I'd agree but cost is always a limiting factor in that regard...
Thanks!
________________________________
From: Jared Still [mailto:jkstill@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 4:04 PM
To: Khemmanivanh, Somckit
Cc: Vlado Barun; oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Oracle RAC cost justification?
On 6/1/05, Khemmanivanh, Somckit <somckit.khemmanivanh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Let's say we already have Service Guard in house. For new
implementations should we go with MCSG or look at RAC? RAC is an
HA and
scalability solution (MCSG is purely HA). I'm trying to get a
good
RAC might be many things, but HA is not one of them.
The disk subsystem is a single point of failure: you only have one
database.
--
Jared Still
Certifiable Oracle DBA and Part Time Perl Evangelist
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
