Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
oracle + linux/bsd
56 views
Skip to first unread message
geos
Jan 12, 2012, 4:43:14 PM1/12/12
to
I wonder what are the requirements for the minimally sized redhat-like
distribution (or centos, or fedora) which allow oracle to run without
issues? suppose I just don't want do download and install those GBs for
the system. what would be minimalistic distribution to run oracle?
and another question: what is the reason for not porting oracle to bsd
family systems? are there really serious technical/philosophical
differences which make porting not an option? I saw some pages which
describe installing oracle on non-supported linuxes (like gentoo): do
this, do that and basically you're done and oracle works. but when it
comes to bsd the only information was reporting Oracle 8.0.5 and 9i run
on freebsd. it looks like tough task to run oracle on bsd. why?
thank you
--
geos
followup-to set for this message to: comp.databases.oracle.server
distribution (or centos, or fedora) which allow oracle to run without
issues? suppose I just don't want do download and install those GBs for
the system. what would be minimalistic distribution to run oracle?
and another question: what is the reason for not porting oracle to bsd
family systems? are there really serious technical/philosophical
differences which make porting not an option? I saw some pages which
describe installing oracle on non-supported linuxes (like gentoo): do
this, do that and basically you're done and oracle works. but when it
comes to bsd the only information was reporting Oracle 8.0.5 and 9i run
on freebsd. it looks like tough task to run oracle on bsd. why?
thank you
--
geos
followup-to set for this message to: comp.databases.oracle.server
joel garry
Jan 12, 2012, 5:08:01 PM1/12/12
to
minimal gladstone oracle install
Don't know about bsd, 22 years ago I ran O6 on SunOS which was then a
bsd variant. I speculate something about shared memory and
interprocess communication details. It could just be linux was a
religion that got pushed late last century.
jg
--
@home.com is bogus.
“There are 1 billion mobile connections in China, and two-thirds
access the web via mobile phones. That’s about as many people as live
in the U.S.” I hope that is a misquote.
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/jan/10/qualcomms-ces-keynote-power-wireless-technology/
Mladen Gogala
Jan 12, 2012, 5:19:14 PM1/12/12
to
On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 22:43:14 +0100, geos wrote:
> and another question: what is the reason for not porting oracle to bsd
> family systems?
The reason has something to do with the pictures of dead US presidents.
> and another question: what is the reason for not porting oracle to bsd
> family systems?
BSD customers will not pay for the maintenance of "Sayonara". Linux,
Windows, HP-UX, AIX and zOS customers will.
--
http://mgogala.byethost5.com
Mladen Gogala
Jan 12, 2012, 5:21:39 PM1/12/12
to
On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 14:08:01 -0800, joel garry wrote:
> It could just be linux was a
> religion that got pushed late last century.
There is only one God and Linus Torvalds is his prophet! Emacs using
> It could just be linux was a
> religion that got pushed late last century.
infidels will suffer for eternity!
--
http://mgogala.byethost5.com
geos
Jan 12, 2012, 6:33:32 PM1/12/12
to
joel garry wrote:
> Google:
> minimal gladstone oracle install
joel, did you mean this site:
> Google:
> minimal gladstone oracle install
http://diznix.com/2011/03/21/gladstone/
> Don't know about bsd, 22 years ago I ran O6 on SunOS which was then a
> bsd variant. I speculate something about shared memory and
> interprocess communication details. It could just be linux was a
> religion that got pushed late last century.
geos
onedbguru
Jan 14, 2012, 11:01:47 PM1/14/12
to
Enterprise Linux - there have been some rumors that O is entertaining
the idea of ceasing future support for RedHat and only supporting OEL
- even though OEL is a RedHat variant.
Pól
Mar 28, 2012, 11:12:43 PM3/28/12
to
On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 22:43:14 +0100, geos wrote:
> I wonder what are the requirements for the minimally sized redhat-like
> distribution (or centos, or fedora) which allow oracle to run without
> issues? suppose I just don't want do download and install those GBs for
> the system. what would be minimalistic distribution to run oracle?
Runs fine on recent Ubuntu.
> distribution (or centos, or fedora) which allow oracle to run without
> issues? suppose I just don't want do download and install those GBs for
> the system. what would be minimalistic distribution to run oracle?
> and another question: what is the reason for not porting oracle to bsd
> family systems? are there really serious technical/philosophical
> differences which make porting not an option?
systems would normally be inclined to run PostgreSQL or MySQL.
> I saw some pages which
> describe installing oracle on non-supported linuxes (like gentoo): do
> this, do that and basically you're done and oracle works. but when it
> comes to bsd the only information was reporting Oracle 8.0.5 and 9i run
> on freebsd. it looks like tough task to run oracle on bsd. why?
executable on *BSD - but they cater to different markets - *BSD is
a workhorse server for lots of functionality, but not for Oracle
and the like...
Paul...
> thank you
Robert Klemme
Mar 31, 2012, 5:27:02 AM3/31/12
to
On 03/29/2012 05:12 AM, Pól wrote:
> You can run a Linux emulation layer which allows you to run any Linux
> executable on *BSD - but they cater to different markets - *BSD is
> a workhorse server for lots of functionality, but not for Oracle
> and the like...
I don't understand what you mean by that. How do you differentiate "a
> You can run a Linux emulation layer which allows you to run any Linux
> executable on *BSD - but they cater to different markets - *BSD is
> a workhorse server for lots of functionality, but not for Oracle
> and the like...
workhorse server for lots of functionality" from Linux or from a system
which is capable of running Oracle databases?
Kind regards
robert
Pól
Apr 10, 2012, 4:29:19 PM4/10/12
to
On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 11:27:02 +0200, Robert Klemme wrote:
>> You can run a Linux emulation layer which allows you to run any Linux
>> executable on *BSD - but they cater to different markets - *BSD is a
>> workhorse server for lots of functionality, but not for Oracle and the
>> like...
> I don't understand what you mean by that. How do you differentiate "a
> workhorse server for lots of functionality" from Linux or from a system
> which is capable of running Oracle databases?
Oracle *if* Oracle chose to certify them.
What I meant about "workhorse server" is that the *BSD's have taken
on the role of "invisible workhorse of the internet". Basically
the *BSD's got "screwed" by the licencing disputes in the mid-
to late-90's - Linux had the momentum - Torvalds himself has said
that he wouldn't have bothered to develop Linux if BSD had been
available.
Another example of superior technology being beaten by bad luck...
Paul...
> robert
joel garry
Apr 10, 2012, 5:25:41 PM4/10/12
to
On Apr 10, 1:29 pm, Pól
Or was it? http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/BSD_is_Dying
(I was looking for statistics on what proportion of servers ran BSD,
having some vague memory that lots of routers did, but once I saw that
suicide note I had to give a hat tip. An argument could be made that
with so much Apple stuff derived from BSD, it's the lightweight
clients that rule the BSD world. Wikipedia has several lists of
things based on BSD.)
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/apr/09/us-agency-warns-against-tijuana-want-ads-placed-dr/
(I was looking for statistics on what proportion of servers ran BSD,
having some vague memory that lots of routers did, but once I saw that
suicide note I had to give a hat tip. An argument could be made that
with so much Apple stuff derived from BSD, it's the lightweight
clients that rule the BSD world. Wikipedia has several lists of
things based on BSD.)
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/apr/09/us-agency-warns-against-tijuana-want-ads-placed-dr/
Mladen Gogala
Apr 10, 2012, 7:58:14 PM4/10/12
to
On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 14:25:41 -0700, joel garry wrote:
> Or was it? http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/BSD_is_Dying
>
> (I was looking for statistics on what proportion of servers ran BSD,
> having some vague memory that lots of routers did, but once I saw that
> suicide note I had to give a hat tip. An argument could be made that
> with so much Apple stuff derived from BSD, it's the lightweight clients
> that rule the BSD world. Wikipedia has several lists of things based on
> BSD.)
Did you see this:
> Or was it? http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/BSD_is_Dying
>
> (I was looking for statistics on what proportion of servers ran BSD,
> having some vague memory that lots of routers did, but once I saw that
> suicide note I had to give a hat tip. An argument could be made that
> with so much Apple stuff derived from BSD, it's the lightweight clients
> that rule the BSD world. Wikipedia has several lists of things based on
> BSD.)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7833143728685685343
What people don't realize is that BSD is BSOD without the letter "O".
Everything else is the same. This is the driving farce behind BSD, my
friends:
http://www.mofam.net/images/blue-screen-of-death_1152%5B1%5D.jpg
I don't always drink beer, but when I do, I drink "Dos Equis".
Stay thirsty, my friends.
--
http://mgogala.byethost5.com
Pól
Apr 10, 2012, 9:43:43 PM4/10/12
to
On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 23:58:14 +0000, Mladen Gogala wrote:
> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7833143728685685343
Worth it just for the "logo" of Beastie doing Tux at the end ;)
Paul...
joel garry
Apr 11, 2012, 7:15:30 PM4/11/12
to
On Apr 10, 4:58 pm, Mladen Gogala <gogala.mla...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 14:25:41 -0700, joel garry wrote:
> > Or was it?http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/BSD_is_Dying
> On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 14:25:41 -0700, joel garry wrote:
>
> > (I was looking for statistics on what proportion of servers ran BSD,
> > having some vague memory that lots of routers did, but once I saw that
> > suicide note I had to give a hat tip. An argument could be made that
> > with so much Apple stuff derived from BSD, it's the lightweight clients
> > that rule the BSD world. Wikipedia has several lists of things based on
> > BSD.)
>
> Did you see this:
>
> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7833143728685685343
Thanks for that! What Pól said.
> > (I was looking for statistics on what proportion of servers ran BSD,
> > having some vague memory that lots of routers did, but once I saw that
> > suicide note I had to give a hat tip. An argument could be made that
> > with so much Apple stuff derived from BSD, it's the lightweight clients
> > that rule the BSD world. Wikipedia has several lists of things based on
> > BSD.)
>
> Did you see this:
>
> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7833143728685685343
>
> What people don't realize is that BSD is BSOD without the letter "O".
> Everything else is the same. This is the driving farce behind BSD, my
> friends:http://www.mofam.net/images/blue-screen-of-death_1152%5B1%5D.jpg
>
> I don't always drink beer, but when I do, I drink "Dos Equis".
> Stay thirsty, my friends.
http://staythirstymyfriends.com/
0 new messages