My experience is that 9iAS requires >1G RAM to run well. More if you want
IFS... Given that the typical inexpensive Intel box is capped at 4GB and
Microsoft won't let you use more than 3GB (2.5 realistically) on a 4GB machine,
or half of your real RAM if you have less than 4GB, and that a typica
savings)
> > was the performance a problem for you where on the Intel boxes?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Larry G. Elkins
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Jared Still [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Thurs
performance a problem for you where on the Intel boxes?
>
> Regards,
>
> Larry G. Elkins
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Jared Still [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2001 7:14 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROT
On 13 Apr 2001, at 17:12, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Copies to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date sent: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 17:12:54 -0500
> And where did you get the info on 8.1.7 and Forms Server not being able to
> be on the same NT / W
Eric,
Thanks for the feedback, and yes, the Intel boxes would be running NT. The
DB will still be on the HP V2500.
And where did you get the info on 8.1.7 and Forms Server not being able to
be on the same NT / W2K machine? I am about to try to install 9iAS on my W2K
box at home. I already have 8
April 12, 2001 7:14 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: 9iAS -- Boxes on which to run
>
>
>
> Sorry to hear this Larry.
>
> At BlueCross we moved the server off of Intel ( Dual 500 MHZ, NT
> 4.0 ) because
> it was *so* much easier to support on So
On 12 Apr 2001, at 16:30, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Date sent: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 16:30:24 -0800
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Currently running a Dev2k 2.1 web enabled application using 7.3.4 on an
> HP-UX V2500 16 processor box wi
Sorry to hear this Larry.
At BlueCross we moved the server off of Intel ( Dual 500 MHZ, NT 4.0 ) because
it was *so* much easier to support on Solaris. This sounds like a backwards
move that probably cost more in the long run due to maintenance and downtime.
Jared
On Thursday 12 April 2001
