Re: Documentation for reasons to NOT use RAC?
- From: Adam Musch <ahmusch@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: TESTAJ3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 09:53:41 -0600
Compare the marginal cost of RAC for each systems to a realistic
cost-of-downtime for each system -- include downtime for upgrades and
server-level outages. My suspicion is that unless there's a
hard-and-fast 24x7x365 availability requirement for a customer-facing
revenue-generating system, RAC will be significantly more expensive
than the alternative.
What's the cost differential between, say, an 8-core SMP machine with
Oracle vs. 2 4-cores plus the marginal cost of RAC?
How much more is management willing to spend on human costs around
RAC; RAC systems do require more effort to configure and manage;
there's more stuff to do, and generally RAC-qualified DBAs cost more.
Also, a single-node RAC implementation will always be slower than a
standard non-RAC implementation. Oracle's code path for single node
RAC still has to go through all the global enqueue and global cache
logic; the whole point of single-node RAC is to provide that sort of
regresssion testing.
Even if RAC is free for all of your systems, it's still not free, and
still not worth it.
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 6:52 AM, <TESTAJ3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I'm being pulled into a meeting later this morning to answer why we
> shouldn't put every db in RAC? Any white papers etc, stating why its a bad
> idea?
>
> thanks, joe
>
> _______________________________________
> Joe Testa, Oracle Certified Professional
> Senior Engineering & Administration Lead
> (Work) 614-677-1668
> (Cell) 614-312-6715
>
> Interested in helping out your marriage?
> Ask me about "Weekend to Remember"
>
--
Adam Musch
ahmusch@xxxxxxxxx
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
