Re: Database Control vs. Grid Control

My 2cents are inline

On 3/30/07, Allen, Brandon <Brandon.Allen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


 Hi List,

I know there's already been a lot of discussion about Grid Control lately,
but this is a different question that I couldn't find any discussion about
on this list or anywhere else out on the web - my question is simply:

    Do I really need Grid Control (GC) or should I just use the individual
Database Control (DBC)?

If you're just managing one or two databases, then DBC is probably the way
to go, but at what point does the overhead of installing and maintaining
Grid Control begin to make sense?  Certainy the answer will depend on the
specifics of each environment, so here are the specifics of mine:



My thinking is that when there are more than one DB on a machine, it's
better to have GC on another one to monitor these DBs.

I'll be running about fifty 10.2.0.3 databases (Std. Ed.) on a 3-node HPUX

11.11 cluster (HA/failover, not RAC).  I don't plan to use any of the
management packs (I can't even if I wanted to since it's Std. Ed.) so I'm
only considering the base EM products in my decision.

Here are my thoughts so far:


   1. With GC, I'll have a single URL to go to for a consolidated view
   of all 50 databases vs. DBC where each database will have a separate URL.



And also you can create groups of dbs and have a better look at these groups




   1. With GC, I'll need an extra database for the repository, but this
   can be consolidated with my rcat repository too.  GC will have the overhead
   of the OMS and its repository database running on one node (unless I put it
   on a separate server of its own, but I'm hoping to avoid that), plus an
   agent on each of the 3 nodes.  With DBC, I'll have the overhead of the Java
   processes, agents, host metric gathering &
   storage and everything else associated with DBC multiplied by each of my 50
   databases.  I'm not really sure which configuration will cause the most
   overhead, but it seems to me that it would most likely be the 50 instances
   of DBC - any thoughts?



Surely one agent consumes less than a dbconsole (it does the same thing plus
the interface , i.e. all the java things)



   1. With my only other 10g database I'm using DBC on AIX 5.3 and I
   have problems occasionally with DBC not responding and then I have to
   restart it a few times before it starts working again.  With 50 instances of
   DBC in this environment I'm afraid I could be constantly restarting the DBC
   processes.  Maybe GC would be more stable?



It'll be surely more stable than several dbconsoles on the same machine



   1. I have no experience installing & configuring GC, but from what
   I've seen on this list it seems to be quite a challenge to get it running
   properly, although it sounds like recent releases are significanly better
   than the early ones.  Do I really need the extra headache?



My advice: if you have a 32bits machine, use linux and install 10.2.0.1 and
immediately upgrade it to 10.2.0.3. If it's a 64bits machine install the x64
version (10.2.0.3 direct). I would not advise you install it on your db
servers. use another machine.



   1. For *database management only*, does GC provide any extra
   functionality over DBC other than just the consolidation of information from
   multiple databases?  None that I know of but please enlighten me if I'm
   missing anything.



No



   1. Is an Enterprise Edition database license required for running
   Grid Control?  I don't see this stated anywhere in the 10.2 online
   docs, but it is mentioned on a slide from a 1-day seminar I attended a few
   months ago.  I've opened an SR and am awaiting confirmation.  This could
   make my decision for me.



You do not pay the licence for the repository db, and it is an EE (it has
partitioning, ...)

Are there any other important factors I've failed to consider?  Have any of

you tried both DBC & GC and discovered any major benefits of one over the
other (for database management only)?

Thanks in advance for your time and thoughts.

Regards,
Brandon


Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message or
attachments hereto. Please advise immediately if you or your employer do not
consent to Internet email for messages of this kind. Opinions, conclusions
and other information in this message that do not relate to the official
business of this company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed
by it.

Other related posts: