Is it worth running RAC on 64 bit hardware? Not sure if it's worth it.
Would like to know the trade offs between 32 and 64 RAC installations.

TIA,

biru

biru wrote:

> Is it worth running RAC on 64 bit hardware? Not sure if it's worth it.
> Would like to know the trade offs between 32 and 64 RAC installations.

If you have 64-bit hardware lying around, or if your environment can take
advantage of 64-bit hardware, then by all means use 64-bit RAC.

Search the archives or http://groups.google.com - just yesterday someone in
this forum asked about 64-bit software in general. The jump in thought
process from 64-bit software to 64-bit RAC should not be to great.

/Hans

biru wrote:
> Is it worth running RAC on 64 bit hardware? Not sure if it's worth it.
> Would like to know the trade offs between 32 and 64 RAC installations.
>
> TIA,
>
> biru

What do you think the subject of your post is? I can't imagine what your
question has to do with RAC at all.

--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
damorgan@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)

RAC can scale horizontally e.g., drop more servers in parallel, and cpu can
scale buswise by adding more address lines e.g., 32 vs 64 bit. 64 bit also
presents limitations with supported hardware etc.. I was hoping that I would
hear from someone that has perfromed a relative and comprehensie
cost/benefit analysis.

By the way, the subject of the post is "32 bit vs 64 bit RAC on Intel
Architecture" and I'm sorry if this confuses anyone.


"Daniel Morgan" <damorgan@x.washington.edu> wrote in message
news:1094180848.141905@yasure...
> biru wrote:
> > Is it worth running RAC on 64 bit hardware? Not sure if it's worth it.
> > Would like to know the trade offs between 32 and 64 RAC installations.
> >
> > TIA,
> >
> > biru
>
> What do you think the subject of your post is? I can't imagine what your
> question has to do with RAC at all.
>
> --
> Daniel A. Morgan
> University of Washington
> damorgan@x.washington.edu
> (replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
>