Linux or Windows 2003 (64 bit) for hosting an Oracle database

linuxoraclewindows

Copied from StackOverflow

Are there any overwhelming reasons to pick one over the other?

I'm in the middle. Our database administrator says that Oracle on Linux is better, but cannot present proof. Our hardware administrators only know Windows.

Right now we're proceeding with Linux, but I'd feel better if I could find some proof that it was a better OS for hosting Oracle.

The database has 500 GB of data. I know it's not big, but we have some processes that are taxing our Windows 2003 (32 bit) server.

— Edit —
I've seen several very good arguments for either one. Nothing that makes the decision easier, but good points none the less. It looks like there isn't a definite "bad" choice.

Best Answer

if your server admins knows only Windows (MS-only shop) - you should use Oracle on Windows... or do you want as a DBA to maintain O/S, install O/S patches, handle O/S security, do O/S backups etc etc?

However, in case of mixed shop, I usually recommend Oracle on Linux for various reasons (some might be subjective):

  1. Better stability, drivers and market experience of linux 64 bit vs Windows 64 bit
  2. Linux is more flexible to tweaking and configuration
  3. Linux is the development platform as far as I know - releases / patches usually comes faster
  4. Since linux is open source, Oracle R&D can better investigate issues
  5. You can optionally get support from Oracle for the O/S (and VM) - "single throat to choke"
  6. Linux is considered more secure (but if you consider it flame - ignore it)
  7. I personally don't like all the registry and windows services stuff - need to hunt down NLS registry configuration etc is not nice
  8. Seem to be more customers using linux in higher-end configurations (RAC, data guard etc) than Windows.

But anyway, for your developers, accessing Oracle on windows or linux is the same, totally transparent. They should be checking Oracle goodies for .NET either way.

Related Topic