Re: Fwd: Re: Downsides to OMF?

  • From: De DBA <dedba@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: Oracle Discussion List <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 09:46:12 +1000

You actually mount physical files on different databases?? What if a dba on one db makes it RW? Or on both?


Not unthinkable: I've had to recover databases in the past where a junior had done just that through the EM interface..

Cheers,
Tony

On 23/03/10 5:12 AM, Vit Spinka wrote:
Hi all,

one downside can be the automatical deletion of files. Think of sharing
read-only tablespaces among multiple databases (using TTS) - if you drop
it from the first database, the files get deleted.

Vit

Dne 22.3.2010 19:28, Charles Schultz napsal(a):
Good day, list,

We are holding an internal discussion about the pros and cons of using
Oracle-managed files. In trying to gauge what Real World DBAs have
concluded, I am finding a lot of google hits that basically parrot the
mantra put forth by the Oracle Documentation. Basically, from what
little exposure we have had and what little I can find online, the major
disadvantage of using OMF can be boiled down to:
1. non-human-sensical names
2. Oracle related bugs (*gasp*)

Is that it? Has anyone ever run into a situation where they were using
OMF and thought, for a second, "Man, this would be so much easier if I
had manually-managed files!"?

Note that I am not concerned about ASM/RAC in this context - that adds a
lot of spice to this discussion that I'll get into later. *grin*

--
Charles Schultz

--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l




--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l


Other related posts: