Stephen I agree with your comments re scalability vs fault tolerance. Actually the configuration I am looking at is 16 CPUS. So it is either one domain (vertical) of 16 CPUS or 4 nodes of 4 CPUs each or 2 nodes of 8 CPUS each.
And on top of this I have to cater for a Standby environment as well. The standby will definitely not be a big box like an E12K but maybe (if talking SUN) say V880 or 4800 . tony At 06:54 AM 05/08/2003 -0800, you wrote: >I think the point of RAC is fault tolerance, not scalability. If it's >performance you want then you want a bigger box, not more boxes. 8 CPUs is >not big. You sure don't need the expensive hardware if all you want to run >is 8 CPUs. It would be better to go with a smaller frame and use the money >you save to get more CPUs and additional I/O capacity. For example, instead >of E12K with 8 CPUs, get 4810 with 12 CPUs -- unless you have definite plans >to push the E12K out to its limits in the future. Don't forget to consider >the backup requirements of a 5 - 10 TByte database. Another consideration, >I think, is that those big, fancy boxes require additional sys admin skills. > >-----Original Message----- >Hi All > >I would like to ask for your thoughts on whether to RAC or just go vertical >(more cpu) > >Background > >Txn - OLTP like txn during day but batch extracts at night and > very big batch extract periodically >Data Volume - 5-10 TByte >Data volatility - 99 % of data is very much like a ware house (unchanged) > other 1% is read/update/delete/insert > >Options >1. Say a very large server like a HP Superdome or SUN E12000 > with 8 CPUs > Server already exist so cost is in obtaining additional CPU/Blades > ie Traditional Server using plain old vanilla Oracle EE > - can still increase head room. > - batch programs can utilise all 8 CPUs > - storage system need not cater for clustering > >2, Same large server like a HP Superdome or SUN E12000 but partitioned > into two. Each with 4 CPU. > Oracle RDBMS + RAC option > - storage server need to cater for cluster config > - max performance for batch is with 4 CPUs only > > >Which would you prefer and why. I am not convinced with the RAC option. >Now >if I was going with cheaper Intel servers like Dell servers with 4 CPUS >each, and >purchase say 4 nodes of 4 cpus each, that would be a different story. In >this case >I have the equipment and ability to grow vertically. > >ta >tony >-- >Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net >-- >Author: Stephen Lee > INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Fat City Network Services -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com >San Diego, California -- Mailing list and web hosting services >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message >to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in >the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L >(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may >also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing). -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net -- Author: INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com San Diego, California -- Mailing list and web hosting services --------------------------------------------------------------------- To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
