Re: Oracle Standard Edition & RAC
- From: "Paul Drake" <bdbafh@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: kevinc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 17:18:58 -0500
On 1/4/07, Kevin Closson <kevinc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
There are an awful lot of systems out there that have time to do batch
stuff (like stats etc) overnight, that would arguably do index creation out
of hours as well and don't do 300M worth of data transfer/redo generation in
a 10 minute window of normal use, let alone per second. A rather surprising
number of these people believe they need/have been sold/want to imagine that
they are large enough to need EE and not a 'Workgroup' product. I disagree
with them:)
…I'm with you…so if SE fits 200-500 users and such systems don't need
PQO—hence we label it "Workgroup", why Oracle at all? I'm not being
"typically ascerbic Kevin" here. I don't know how app development on SE
compares to, say SQL Server and what the portfolio of apps looks like with
Oracle for workgroups over other databases. Can someome tell me why Oracle
at all at such a low scale?
1. backup/restore/recovery is rock solid.
2. if/when time comes to throw money at the problem in terms of bigger box,
more CPUs, EE, partitioning, etc ... no re-write of the application is
required.
3. because the CFO likes it
4. in 10g, they don't need a dba.
ok, I'll stop there.
Paul
--
-- ALTER SESSION SET EVENTS 'immediate trace name hanganalyze level 4';
Other related posts:
