RE: Oracle Standard Edition & RAC
- From: "Laimutis Nedzinskas" <Laimutis.Nedzinskas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 09:38:58 -0000
The the saying in our region goes:
one beaten bastard is worth two unbeaten ones.
Brgds,
Laimis N.
________________________________
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Andrey Kriushin
Sent: 5. janúar 2007 09:30
To: niall.litchfield@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: gorbyx@xxxxxxxxx; kevinc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Oracle Standard Edition & RAC
Hi,
what I would NEVER recommend to anybody is the scaling with RAC on Win 32-bit.
The customer decided to "protect the investments in the hardware", so one of 3
node RAC was equipped with 8 32-bit Xeons. The other 2 were 64-bit capable.
There also was VLM.
I'll never forget that implementation. Count it as my biggest failure in ~10
years of Oracle experience, though it was not purely my fault (I've joined the
project just before going into production and was unable to stop that mess).
I know now, that use_indirect_data_buffers leads to ~doubling the space
required for buffer headers. I've seen 20-30 thousands of reloads/hour on the
normally loaded system. I've seen how LMD loses the info about global lock (in
our case it was mainly LB, but two of tens cases might be attributed to losing
BH). The bug (5595214) was opened but didn't resolved, as we managed to
convince the customer to continue to "protect his investment" in a reporting
server :-).
The version was 10.2.0.2.8P if anybody is interested.
HTH
--Andrey
Fyrirvari/Disclaimer
http://www.landsbanki.is/disclaimer
Other related posts:
