RE: Documentation for reasons to NOT use RAC?
- From: "Goulet, Richard" <Richard.Goulet@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <niall.litchfield@xxxxxxxxx>, <Freek.DHooge@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 09:35:30 -0500
I have mixed feelings about RAC. Done properly it can allow one to
replace very expensive hardware with a lot cheaper kit, but then you've
got the problem of that RAC bill that's several times the hardware cost.
It can also allow you to run a very large number of users at one time,
something probably very useful to the likes of Google, and others like
them. It's also very helpful for the odd hardware failure, but since
today's servers are more fault tolerant that may be of limited benefit.
Maybe the best argument for RAC is politics. Many years ago, as a blue
suitor, I explained to a general that it was both cheaper and faster to
use standard test equipment to support some avionics systems than
Automatic Test Equipment (ATE). Well, that was all fine & dandy, but
the politics of the day was to financially support, meaning acquire as
much as we could, the ATE manufacturers. So even though the facts were
against it the USAF bought a lot of ATE that cost more to buy, maintain,
and run just to keep the politicians happy. The same argument can be
made for RAC. It just makes your boss feel more secure.
Dick Goulet
Senior Oracle DBA/NA Team Lead
PAREXEL International
Other related posts:
