8 Responses

  1. Jay Weinshenker
    Jay Weinshenker at |

    Excellent design. I've long been an advocate of using Oracle Standard Edition when possible since it comes with RAC included and your maximizing the license limitations with 12 cores per CPU was an excellent choice.

    I just wish Oracle would change some of their products to allow use of Standard Edition instead of Enterprise Edition – for example, Oracle E-Business Suite requires Enterprise Edition. Bleh.

    Question regarding setup just out of curiosity – I know in the past you advocated using elevator=deadline vs the standard CFQ elevator – did you do any testing regarding the performance with different elevators in this environment?

    Also, I see you didn't use AMM because of it's incompatibility with huge pages. Did you utilize ASMM (Automatic Shared Memory Management – it was introduced with 10g) to balance the memory between the various sga pools / components and if not, why?

    Like I said before, it sounds like an excellent design for leveraging Oracle Standard Edition.

    1. @vcdxnz001
      @vcdxnz001 at |

      Hi Jay, Re the elevator, we use NOOP, as per my article also on virtualizing Enterprise Oracle Databases on vSphere. I've done quite a lot of testing in virtualized environments with enterprise scale databases and this elevator provides the best performance due to the multiple layers of schedulers and queues that are involved in IO. In my experience getting the IO's to the driver and HBA as fast as possible (with least overhead) offers the best chance of lowest latency and highest throughput. With regard to ASMM, yes I did specify and use that. Within the defined SGA/PGA sizes we allocated Oracle knows best how to use that memory and adjust the different pools when needed. I did quite a few comparison tests running Swingbench 2.3 and 2.4 between using AMM and not using AMM. I found the performance and stability superior with huge pages (no risk of host swapping) and not using AMM. But in all cases ASMM was always enabled.

  2. Oracle RAC on Windows on vSphere « Long White Virtual Clouds

    […] Oracle RAC 11g R2 Standard Edition on vSphere […]

  3. Fight the FUD – Oracle Licensing and Support on VMware vSphere « Long White Virtual Clouds

    […] discussed in my article Oracle RAC 11g R2 Standard Edition on vSphere how you could deploy up to 4 VMware vSphere hosts with a single CPU socket each to run an unlimited […]

  4. Gustavo
    Gustavo at |

    Maybe it has been some time since you wrote the article but it seems that Oracle decide to change the rules (again). Just check the last paragraph below.

    My question is: even changing the licensing rules, is the rule of 4 sockets still in place? I mean: Can SE be used on a cluster with 4 intel sockets (8 core/socket) but paying the SE licenses for 16 processors?

    "Processor: This metric is used in environments where users cannot be identified and counted. The Internet is a typical environment where it is often difficult to count users. This metric can also be used when the Named User Plus population is very high and it is more cost effective for the customer to license the Database using the Processor metric. The Processor metric is not offered for Personal Edition. The number of required licenses shall be determined by multiplying the total number of cores of the processor by a core processor licensing factor specified on the Oracle Processor Core Factor Table which can be accessed at http://oracle.com/contracts.
    All cores on all multicore chips for each licensed program are to be aggregated before multiplying by the appropriate core processor licensing factor and all fractions of a number are to be rounded up to the next whole number. When licensing Oracle programs with Standard Edition One or Standard Edition in the product name, a processor is counted equivalent to a socket; however, in the case of multi-chip modules, each chip in the multi-chip module is counted as one occupied socket."

  5. Gustavo
    Gustavo at |

    Do you mind to share Oracle's email? I'm sure that this was an answer for a direct question but I'd like to understand their positioning and the specific question. I think your customer is a great case!

  6. Gustavo
    Gustavo at |

    This subject seems an old discussion about chip design. IBM POWER up to POWER5 was a MCM Chip and a few others too. This means that they have more than one chip on the same "package". The same applies for some older INTEL processors.

    Since most of the newer chips does not follow this design, the rule still applies.


Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.