Re: ORACLE and 2.4-test10

2000-11-18 Thread Josue Emmanuel Amaro
Frank, You must be looking at Oracle 8.0 docs. If you are looking to update a production system we only support stable kernels. Pre kernels are not yet really stable and therefore not supported. (We had to draw the line somewhere.) That said, we will look into O_DIRECT and kiovects. We may b

Re: ORACLE and 2.4-test10

2000-11-18 Thread Alan Cox
> On Fri, Nov 17, 2000 at 06:14:14PM +, Alan Cox wrote: > > SHM is resolved but O_SYNC is not yet fixed. You could therefore easily lose > > your entire database > > I assume 2.2.18-pre-latest is ok? I certainly hope so 8) Alan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe li

Re: ORACLE and 2.4-test10

2000-11-18 Thread Frank van Maarseveen
On Fri, Nov 17, 2000 at 06:14:14PM +, Alan Cox wrote: > SHM is resolved but O_SYNC is not yet fixed. You could therefore easily lose > your entire database I assume 2.2.18-pre-latest is ok? Some oracle doc still refers to 2.0.34 -- Frank - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsub

Re: ORACLE and 2.4-test10

2000-11-17 Thread Jeff V. Merkey
Alan Cox wrote: > > > performance, so we came up with something called direct FS, a separate > > File System interface just for Oracle. The SOSD layer inside of Oracle > > Yeah but you see thats ugly > > > In NetWare, directFS was little more than a "raw" interface that > > bypassed the file

Re: ORACLE and 2.4-test10

2000-11-17 Thread Alan Cox
> performance, so we came up with something called direct FS, a separate > File System interface just for Oracle. The SOSD layer inside of Oracle Yeah but you see thats ugly > In NetWare, directFS was little more than a "raw" interface that > bypassed the file cache. It would be like having an

Re: ORACLE and 2.4-test10

2000-11-17 Thread Jeff V. Merkey
Alan, When we ported Oracle to NetWare, we found that making changes to the core file systems in NetWare that Oracle needed would tank FS performance, so we came up with something called direct FS, a separate File System interface just for Oracle. The SOSD layer inside of Oracle allows them, vi

Re: ORACLE and 2.4-test10

2000-11-17 Thread Alan Cox
> Can anybody on tell me whatever there are still > serious pitfalls in running Oracle-8.1.6.1R2 on the Yes. > If I rememeber correctly there where some problems with > SHM handling still left to resolve... SHM is resolved but O_SYNC is not yet fixed. You could therefore easily lose your entire

Re: ORACLE and 2.4-test10

2000-11-17 Thread Christoph Rohland
On Fri, 17 Nov 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > If I rememeber correctly there where some problems with > SHM handling still left to resolve... Nope. Greetings Christoph - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL

ORACLE and 2.4-test10

2000-11-17 Thread dalecki
Can anybody on tell me whatever there are still serious pitfalls in running Oracle-8.1.6.1R2 on the current testing version of the 2.4 kernel series? If I rememeber correctly there where some problems with SHM handling still left to resolve... Thank's in advance for any response! - To unsubscribe