Re: rac network question
- From: "Andrew Kerber" <andrew.kerber@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: ganstadba@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 08:48:51 -0600
I'm not even sure it will work. The private network is supposed to be for
node-node communication. A lot of two node racs use a crossover cable for
that connection, just to make sure nothing else will interfere. If this is
truly a high visibility, mission critical database, this is simply a poor
design.
On Jan 11, 2008 8:46 AM, Michael McMullen <ganstadba@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I agree it will work, but isn't the private and public supposed to be
> physically separate, not logically?
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* Matthew Zito [mailto:mzito@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> *Sent:* January 10, 2008 5:08 PM
> *To:* ganstadba@xxxxxxxxxxx; oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Subject:* RE: rac network question
>
>
>
> Actually, just so's we're all clear, with the VLAN support that the
> gentleman described originally, the interfaces will appear separate –
> eth0.1 and eth0.2 (note: different than eth0:1 and eth0:2). The traffic
> will be shared, but as long as the bonding works as it should, it just means
> that if a card is lost, both the interconnect and the VIP will fail over to
> the other link. IMHO, while this is suboptimal, it should work fine.
>
>
>
> Matt
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
--
Andrew W. Kerber
'If at first you dont succeed, dont take up skydiving.'
Other related posts:
