RE: Question about RAC

Anurag,

 

This is standard practice among most RAC installations.  Last week I
upgraded a 4-node cluster that had 5 instances on each node.

 

The obvious question is - How much memory do they have?  Each instance will
require its own SGA.

 

 

 

Bryan Thomas

Senior Consultant and Practice Manager

Performance Tuning Corporation

b_removeme_thomas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

www.perftuning.com

 

 

  _____  

From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of amonte
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 2:38 PM
To: Anurag Verma
Cc: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Question about RAC

 

Sorry I should have stated clearer.

 

Say we have server srv1 and srv2 a database called RAC in the shared storage
and a instance rac1 in srv1 and rac2 in srv2, that is the usual
implementation I have seen.

 

The customer wants this:

 

database RAC and CAR in shared storage

 

instance rac1 and car1 in srv1

instance rac2 and car2 in srv2
 

Obviously rac1 and rac2 forms RAC and car1 and car2 forms CAR. Not very
logical in my opinion, seems like others think so.

 

TIA

 

Alex


 

On 10/30/06, Anurag Verma <anuragdba@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: 

Do you mean for a single database,  use 4 instances each in 2 servers??

 

Then what is the meaning of high availability??

 

If the customer wants RACing 4 seperate databases each with 2 RAC instances
on the 2 servers/nodes, then that is possible.

 

If it is the first case, you have to educate the customer...

 

Anurag

 

On 10/30/06, amonte <ax.mount@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: 

Hi all

 

I have a question about RAC.

 

I have implemented a few RAC on a couple of customers. I have always worked
with two nodes and a single database, i.e 2 servers and a common database in
a shared storage.

 

I have a customer who wants to use 2 servers to implement 4 RACs, i.e hacing
4 instances in each server. Has anyone done this sort of implemntation? I am
not sure if this is logical or ilogical :-)

 

 

Thanks

 

Alex

Other related posts: