RE: uptime
- From: "CRISLER, JON A" <JC1706@xxxxxxx>
- To: "tim@xxxxxxxxx" <tim@xxxxxxxxx>, "oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 02:32:45 +0000
I recently ran across a Red Hat 4 server with 10.2.0.4 that had 625+ days of
uptime, and a Win 2003 server with 10g that had 350+ days uptime. I also ran
across a Netware 4.11 server with Oracle 8i ( I think ) that had 900+ days of
uptime many years ago.
-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Tim Gorman
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2012 11:46 AM
To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: uptime
Of course I cannot resist mentioning...
As of a few years ago, an Oracle Rdb database on OpenVMS belonging to a large
satellite TV provider and hosted by Oracle in Colorado Springs had been up and
running continuously since the 1991 timeframe, or more than
6,000 days since I last heard. I don't know what's happened in the past couple
years, but there might be some on this list who do?
So, not really relevant to the discussion, except as it pertains to "uptime" in
the extreme. And unless you tie VMS to Windows by the fact that both were
primarily designed by the same person (David Cutler) and by old rumor that he
named "Windows NT" because the acronym "WNT" comes from incrementing each of
the letters "VMS" by one (rumor is false: see
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT#Naming";), which itself is a play on
the rumor that the name of the computer "HAL" in the movie
"2001: A Space Odyssey" was derived by decrementing the letters "IBM" by one
(i.e. rumor is false: see
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAL_9000#Origin_of_name";).
...um, OK... (scuttles back under rock)...
On 9/13/2012 9:28 AM, Guillermo Alan Bort wrote:
> We had one sun server with a single database with about 726 days of
> uptime. Obviously nobody ever patched anything there :-P. About
> windows server, the only servers I ever asked to be rebooted weekly
> were a 9i RAC on windows 2000... and every time they rebooted
> performance picked up about 20%. It was only for a few weeks until we
> migrated it to a 10.2 RAC on Linux, though.
> If you are on at least 10.2.0.5 and on windows 2008, I don't think you
> need to reboot that frequently, maybe just once a month or fortnight
> for patching purposes. Also, if you see a performance benefit to
> rebooting, then maybe you have an oversized SGA (probably an oversized shared
> pool).
>
> cheers
> Alan.-
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 12:02 PM, Andrew Kerber
> <andrew.kerber@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>
>> What Oracle version? Are there not some memory leak bugs in some
>> Oracle versions? 9.2.0.3 on some Unix versions for one has memory
>> leaks that require DB restarts as I recall.
>> <SNIP>
>>>
>>>
>>> //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>>
>>
>> --
>> Andrew W. Kerber
>>
>> 'If at first you dont succeed, dont take up skydiving.'
>>
>>
>> --
>> //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>>
>>
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
