Re: Does this happen to you at work?
- From: Paul Drake <bdbafh@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: davewendelken@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 16:15:29 -0400
On 5/10/05, david wendelken <davewendelken@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> Consider a database hosting 3 different unrelated applicatons.
>=20
> >Whilst I wouldn't go so far as to say that we would never have such a
> >database, it would be very unlikely. Far more likely would be three
> >different instances (and associated databases) on the same box, each
> >instance named for the application it hosted.
>=20
> Short of national security concerns, why would you want the extra overhea=
d of two additional database instances instead of just using three schemas =
in one instance?
These come to mind:
1. use of public synonyms in packaged apps.
2. use of overly broad sys_privs in an application role, e.g. select any ta=
ble
3. differences in availability: maintenance windows, uptime
agreements, patchset frequency
4. lack of point in time tablespace recovery in Standard Edition
5. lack of consensus by a matrix management of application owners on
what color the database should be.
Paul
--=20
#/etc/init.d/init.cssd stop
# f=3Dma, divide by 1, convert to moles.
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
