On Feb 26, 2:47*pm, Mladen Gogala <gogala.mla... (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

snip

Your original rant did not have any details on what exact environment
you experienced problems on.

Justifying a test environment is a lot better than explaining after
the fact that one experienced problems in a production environments
because a suitable/matching test environment was not available.

On Feb 26, 2:57*pm, John Hurley <johnbhur... (AT) sbcglobal (DOT) net> wrote:
Yes it is better. This is all I was able to get. There is a recession
out there. It doesn't have anything to do with the fact that Oracle
11.2.0 RAC demands at least one more IP which is as stupid as it gets.
A free IP address is not a small thing to demand and yet nobody has
been informing the (l)users of that fact. Requesting an additional
significant resource without telling anyone is actually as enraging as
the recent Metalink "upgrade".

I will tell you why was the Metalink screwed up (I believe that the
proper word is "upgrade", but I am a foreigner and my English leaves
much room for improvement).
The rumor is that there was some kind of commercial agreement between
Adobe and Oracle which includes Metalink bein switched to flash, which
is profitable for both sides. The problem is that nobody has asked the
users. Also, a requirement for an additional IP is not a small
requirement. Nobody discussed that, either. That is what I am
complaining about. Also, the installation fails with an unintelligible
message. I need to open a SR - again.

On Feb 26, 3:28*pm, Mladen Gogala <gogala.mla... (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

snip

Getting one more IP address is a significant problem? I am just not
understanding why that might pose such a problem.

I guess you could file a bug report on this and see where you get.

As people discover what is required relevant to an 11.2 upgrade it
seems like it will fall into a planning process. Maybe you are out
there on the early discovery path blazing a trail for other people
here.

Do you really need RAC? What approach exactly would you have
recommended Oracle to follow in warning people that they would be
needing this significant item?

On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 15:52:36 -0800, John Hurley wrote:

Trailblazer? Yeah, that sounds like me. Of course, the update process
fails when run as described. Dealing with Oracle RAC on Linux really
needs trailblazers. Now, let me ride and fade away into the sunset, just
my keyboard, my pony and me. Of course, to quote one distinctly non-
western movie, "I'll be back" (with a strong Austrian accent).
The problem is exactly what you said: there is no planning. You always
need something else. I find that in itself a sufficient reason for being
very annoyed. Of course, the fact that Oracle cannot produce a product
which installs without a problem might also have something to do with
that.



--
http://mgogala.freehostia.com

Mladen Gogala wrote,on my timestamp of 27/02/2010 7:28 AM:


Nah, you jut haven't read the composition of the Oracle board of directors of
late, have you? There is an ex-Adobe guy there. How appropriate.
I said it first, nearly 6 months ago: I fully expect Oracle to buy Adobe in the
near future.
They are becoming the modern Computer Associates...

Matthias Hoys wrote,on my timestamp of 27/02/2010 5:35 AM:

You know, that is sounding more and more tempting!
I wonder if IBM's standing offer of a free replacement DB2 licence still stands...

On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 03:41:28 -0800, Steve Howard wrote:

This about sums it up. You're a genius.


--
http://mgogala.freehostia.com

On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 11:11:09 +0100, Sybrand Bakker wrote:

The company that I am working for has no plans to dump Oracle completely
in the short term, but it does have plans and projects, with the budget,
project numbers and project managers, to replace several Oracle databases
with the Postgres databases.

On the other hand, we are considering moving our central oracle DB to
version 11g. There are several features that appeal to us. This project
was to establish how hard would it be to upgrade from Oracle 10.2.0.4 to
Oracle 11.2.0.1. So far, the result is a sheer disaster and I advised my
CIO to wait for the next version.



--
http://mgogala.freehostia.com

On Feb 27, 6:34*pm, Mladen Gogala <gogala.mla... (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

snip

All my systems ( except one ... running 10.2.0.4 on solaris ) are
running now on 11.1.0.7.1 ( linux ) and stable.

No RAC anywhere.

On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 16:29:48 -0800, John Hurley wrote:

If you discount RAC and use available components like Tomcat, JBoss, and
EJB, there is very little that Oracle 11G can do and significantly
cheaper 3rd party cannot do. The way I see things, RAC is the only thing
that Oracle does have and the competition does not have. However, with
partitioning, RAC, diagnostic & tuning pack, Oracle license costs as much
as $50000/CPU and that is a heck of a steep price. In my opinion, if you
want to load 40 tons of something and drive it for 100 miles, you need an
18-wheeler. If you need to your local store and buy a weekly supply of
food & drink for your home, you can probably get away with a
significantly smaller vehicle. The very same principle of the right tool
for the right job applies here. Other databases are getting better and
better and they can do more and more. One needs Oracle RDBMS only to do
the heavy lifting, smaller stuff can be done by other databases. RAC is
the only reason to go for Oracle RDBMS and not for something much, much
cheaper like DB2, SQL*Server or Postgres. I am keeping an eye on Windows
7, if that proves to be a good and scalable OS and if Microsoft improves
the OLTP capabilities of the SQL*Server, who knows, things may still go
the Microsoft way. Postgres is also very potent open source DB, perfectly
sufficient for the HR department of a medium size company. However, if
one needs 24x7 client-facing robust OLTP database which has to have a
near 99.99% uptime, and the ability to support hundreds of users, one
still needs Oracle RAC.


--
http://mgogala.freehostia.com