Re: Multiple installed versions of Oracle
- From: Barbara Baker <barb.baker@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: tracy.rahmlow@xxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 10:01:27 -0600
Tracy:
This is just silly. If you're working for a company that can buy a
separate server for every single installation of oracle, that company
is making too much money.
Any DBA that EVER crashed a db due to "administering db in an
incorrect manner" ought to have their sorry butts fired.
I've had occasions where, for a variety of vendor-related reasons,
I've administered up to 5 different versions. It's a reality of our
business. I've never experienced a problem runing multiple versions.
I'm currently running 5 databases with 7.3.4,
5 databases with 8.1.7.4, and 4 databases with 9.2.0.4, all on the
same server, and all are running just fine.
Just my .02, but you should stick to your guns.
Barb
On Apr 5, 2005 8:55 AM, Tracy Rahmlow <tracy.rahmlow@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> We are in the process of upgrading several databases from 8i on AIX 4.3.3
> to 9 on AIX 5.2 or 10g on AIX 5.2. The target version depends upon
> whether or not the application is supported on 10g or not. If not will be
> migrating toward 9.
> The manager of the unix area has indicated that he has seen issues at his
> previous shop with co-locating multiple versions of Oracle on the same
> server and is basically not allowing the practice. I have never seen or
> heard of this issue, but am trying to remain open-minded to his concern.
> Here are his statements verbatim:
>
> Several occasions where server and db crashed due to dba administering db
> in an incorrect manner. IE mistook one version for the other. Applied
> the incorrect maintenance patch to the incorrect instance.
>
> Several occasions where db versions did not play nice together 7.3.4 and
> 8i.
>
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
