RE: 9205/9206 RAC on Linux RHAS 3.0

  • From: "Magni Fabrizio" <Fabrizio.Magni@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <thump@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 15:57:52 +0100

Maybe this is not relevant but I'm running several on linux
and a few RACs; the difference is that I'm using SLES not RHAS.

The configuration is not "bugless" (especially RAC) but I don't believe
there is a product out there totally bugfree.
Yesterday I experienced a crash on RAC due to the number of
pthread for process. Patching at should solve the problem but
I'm living with crashes since and I'm confident the new patchset
will introduce new issues.

Actually I don't see RAC has the definitive HA solution. I have higher
uptime on single instance systems (to defend RAC I have to admit the one
which crashes is the most stressed system of mine).

AIO is more problematic on SLES(9) than redhat.

Nonetheless linux is my preferred platform for oracle so far.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx=20
> [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of David
> Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2005 10:08 PM
> To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: 9205/9206 RAC on Linux RHAS 3.0
> Are you running 9025 or 9206 on Linux RHAS 3.0 with=20
> disk_asynch_io enabled?
> Are you running RAC?
> If so, I want to please hear from managment wants to=20
> get an idea
> on number of sites running on our platform with AIO.
> Management is leary of the it can cause corruption and it has issues
> statem,entas that have been tosssed around in our community=20
> that I feel
> are more accurate for older versions of Linux and Oracle.
> My understanding is that 9205/9206 oin RHAS 3.0 is stable and no
> significant/known bugs.
> I am verifying the bug aspect and will test, but at this time I'm just
> trying to get approval to test with AIO.
> Thanks
> --=20
> ..
> David
> --
> //

Other related posts: