From: zigzagdna on
On Dec 28, 5:05 pm, newbie <rjngh2...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 28, 10:30 am, hpuxrac <johnbhur...(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 25, 10:35 pm, zigzagdna <zigzag...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > snip
>
> > > I am very confused with Oracle documentation..
>
> > > If one can run several instances of a database on One Node, then it
> > > adds value. For example, one instance can have init.ora optimized for
> > > OLTP, another instance of init.ora optimezed for DSS etc, still one
> > > has just one database and one Node. Both instances can ahve thier own
> > > ORALE_HOME, one can do rolling upgrades.
>
> > Why don't you setup a test environment and check it out?
>
> snip
> Both instances can ahve thier own> > ORALE_HOME, one can do rolling upgrades.
>
> snip
>
> Huh ?
> Are you sure you can do rolling upgrades ?
>
> I dont think so.

Whatever rolling uogrades RAC allows in multi-node environment, I
think one should be able to do in one node RAC.
I still do not know what is the value of one node RAC if only a single
instance of database can be on one node.
From: joel garry on
On Dec 28, 5:42 pm, zigzagdna <zigzag...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Dec 28, 5:05 pm, newbie <rjngh2...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 28, 10:30 am, hpuxrac <johnbhur...(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 25, 10:35 pm, zigzagdna <zigzag...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > snip
>
> > > > I am very confused with Oracle documentation..
>
> > > > If one can run several instances of a database on One Node, then it
> > > > adds value. For example, one instance can have init.ora optimized for
> > > > OLTP, another instance of init.ora optimezed for DSS etc, still one
> > > > has just one database and one Node. Both instances can ahve thier own
> > > > ORALE_HOME, one can do rolling upgrades.
>
> > > Why don't you setup a test environment and check it out?
>
> > snip
> > Both instances can ahve thier own> > ORALE_HOME, one can do rolling upgrades.
>
> > snip
>
> > Huh ?
> > Are you sure you can do rolling upgrades ?
>
> > I dont think so.
>
> Whatever rolling uogrades RAC allows in multi-node environment, I
> think one should be able to do in one node RAC.

Yes, according to the marketing materials, you can migrate the one
node to another node, upgrade the original node, then migrate back -
and these can be virtual nodes. I got a laugh when I tried to access
the marketing materials and got a "file is damaged" error, but was
able to see it with google quick view.
http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/database/clustering/pdf/ds-oracleraconenode-2009.pdf
(same link as Mark posted, I now see).

> I still do not know what is the value of one node RAC if only a single
> instance of database can be on one node.

I think Noons, Mladen and hpuxrac said the real value, but the
marketing material spake thus:

• High Availability
•
Failover protection for
database and server
failures
•
Operating System Rolling
Upgrades and Patches
•
Database Rolling Patches
• Performance
•
Server scalability with no
core limit
•
Online load balancing and
scale-up
•
Online upgrade to Oracle
RAC
• Support for all Oracle
supported platforms
• Standardized database
deployment across enterprise
• Increases the benefit of
Oracle VM with the high
availability and scalability of
Oracle RAC

In my site, I don't need RAC, though there is a big push for virtual
environments on everything else (Virtual Iron).

jg
--
@home.com is bogus.
Bad year for Ponzi schemes. http://www.telegram.com/article/20091229/NEWS/912290348
From: Noons on
Mladen Gogala wrote,on my timestamp of 28/12/2009 1:43 PM:
> On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 23:27:43 +1100, Noons wrote:
>
>> So exactly what is the point of
>> all that "one node RAC" utter marketing nonsense?
>
> That's fairly simple: it is easy to expand one node RAC into two node RAC
> and three node RAC. Basically, it's a sales tool. If you already own one
> node RAC, you are far more likely to expand it into a several node RAC
> than if you just have an Oracle EE server without RAC.

Indeed. To me that's exactly how it reads. All the arguments put forward in
its favour are nothing but a pile of marketing excrement: the thing is just a
ruse to nail sites to the RAC bandwagon, period. Never mind if folks need RAC
or not, that's immaterial!
Just like the idiotic videos of the 2 dbas, with the "savvy looking girl" doing
"everything with a click of the mouse". Most of what she does, she'd simply be
fired on the spot at most sites...
From: Noons on
joel garry wrote,on my timestamp of 30/12/2009 4:13 AM:

>
> • High Availability
> •

How, with only one node?


> Failover protection for
> database and server
> failures

Failover to WHAT, since it's a single node?

> •
> Operating System Rolling
> Upgrades and Patches

How? In a single node? I'd love to see proof...

> •
> Database Rolling Patches

See above

> • Performance

Really? So, single node non-RAC databases perform what? Badly?...

> •
> Server scalability with no
> core limit

Hmmmmm..., must be that snuff thing in action again.
I'd love to have one of these servers they keep talking about...

> •
> Online load balancing and
> scale-up

And that of course is possible with a single node?

> •
> Online upgrade to Oracle
> RAC

At last! A smidgeon of reality...

> • Support for all Oracle
> supported platforms

Ah OK: so single node non_RAC does not support all platforms that RAC supports?
Where is the RAC version for Mac osx then?


> • Standardized database
> deployment across enterprise

Ah yes: so, non-RAC is non-standard now?

> • Increases the benefit of
> Oracle VM with the high
> availability and scalability of
> Oracle RAC

How many sites out there are running production RAC dbs in a virtual
environment? Last time I asked back in mid2009, I got no answer...


> In my site, I don't need RAC, though there is a big push for virtual
> environments on everything else (Virtual Iron).

Same here, Jgar. And let me say this while I'm here:
none of the above applies to you, I understand you're just quoting.

and quite frankly, the sort of total marketing excrement above is reflecting
very badly on Oracle's credibility as a db supplier...

From: joel garry on
On Dec 30, 6:04 am, Noons <wizofo...(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> joel garry wrote,on my timestamp of 30/12/2009 4:13 AM:
>
>
>
> > • High Availability
> > •
>
> How, with only one node?
>
> > Failover protection for
> > database and server
> > failures
>
> Failover to WHAT, since it's a single node?

They are referring to running RAC on a single node of a cluster, so
they can auto start on another node when failover.

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache%3Asfmkrhr1lUIJ%3Awww.oracle.com%2Ftechnology%2Fproducts%2Fdatabase%2Fclustering%2Fpdf%2Fds-oracleraconenode-2009.pdf+http%3A%2F%2Fwww.oracle.com%2Ftechnology%2Fproducts%2Fdatabase%2Fclustering%2Fpdf%2Fds-oracleraconenode-2009.pdf&hl=en&gl=us&sig=AHIEtbSs0FJaKY-eRr6t-EuWQE_chsu5sw&pli=1

>
> > •
> > Operating System Rolling
> > Upgrades and Patches
>
> How?  In a single node?  I'd love to see proof...

That would be the Omotion utility. "Your search - oracle +omotion
site:tahiti.oracle.com - did not match any documents. "

Funny what sites come up googling for Omotion. I still have a button
from the early '80s that has a circular TKB forever and ever and
ever... (referring to the DEC Task Builder, particularly its
performance on Rainbow IIRC). Perhaps now we need one that says DKB
forever and ever and ever and...

>
> > •
> > Database Rolling Patches
>
> See above
>
> > • Performance
>
> Really?  So, single node non-RAC databases perform what?  Badly?...
>
> > •
> > Server scalability with no
> > core limit
>
> Hmmmmm..., must be that snuff thing in action again.
> I'd love to have one of these servers they keep talking about...
>
> > •
> > Online load balancing and
> > scale-up
>
> And that of course is possible with a single node?

Simple, just move to a larger VM. Or two. (what was that goofy face
smiley again?)

>
> > •
> > Online upgrade to Oracle
> > RAC
>
> At last! A smidgeon of reality...
>
> > • Support for all Oracle
> > supported platforms
>
> Ah OK: so single node non_RAC does not support all platforms that RAC supports?
>   Where is the RAC version for Mac osx then?

Glad I wasn't sipping the coffee just then...

>
> > • Standardized database
> > deployment across enterprise
>
> Ah yes: so, non-RAC is non-standard now?

I revel in non-conformity!

>
> > • Increases the benefit of
> > Oracle VM with the high
> > availability and scalability of
> > Oracle RAC
>
> How many sites out there are running production RAC dbs in a virtual
> environment?  Last time I asked back in mid2009, I got no answer...

Yeah, it's like how many DB2 environments are running 32000 linux
images.

>
> > In my site, I don't need RAC, though there is a big push for virtual
> > environments on everything else (Virtual Iron).
>
> Same here, Jgar.  And let me say this while I'm here:
> none of the above applies to you, I understand you're just quoting.

I know, but thanks for clarifying for those who don't.

>
> and quite frankly, the sort of total marketing excrement above is reflecting
> very badly on Oracle's credibility as a db supplier...

This is nothing new.

jg
--
@home.com is bogus
Scott misspelled "Garry": http://www.dilbert.com/2009-12-27/