Re: Using RAC for 25+ small to medium sized database
- From: "Jim Kennedy" <jim dot scuba dot kennedy at gee male dot com>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 21:20:18 -0800
<englishguy2006@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1138677938.409405.163690@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> The alternative would be to have 25 instances running on each server
> each with buffer cache, large pool, shared pool, java pool, redo
> buffers plus each of these instances would have up to 20 oracle
> processes and there would also be 25 different database caches talking
> to each other from one blade server to another. Finally there's
> additional licensing cost plus some possible changes when moving a
> non-RAC database to RAC, 5 sets of archive/redo logs, 5 alert log files
> / database. I think that makes for a lot of overhead which is why I'm
> thinking the non RAC idea of the virtual servers would be the way to
> go. I should also mention that high availability is important but not
> critical for these databases.
>
Why so many instances? If possible use schema's. But doing all that in
VMware doesn't reduce overhead it makes it much larger. (additional OS
processes etc.) Do you need rac for develpment? Do you need that many
different instances? Why not different schema's?
Jim
.
- References:
- Using RAC for 25+ small to medium sized database
- From: englishguy2006
- Re: Using RAC for 25+ small to medium sized database
- From: Jim Kennedy
- Re: Using RAC for 25+ small to medium sized database
- From: englishguy2006
- Using RAC for 25+ small to medium sized database
- Prev by Date: Re: Oracle Streams v Advanced Queuing/Replication
- Next by Date: Re: Using RAC for 25+ small to medium sized database
- Previous by thread: Re: Using RAC for 25+ small to medium sized database
- Next by thread: Re: Using RAC for 25+ small to medium sized database
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|