Re: Server Architecture

It does sound like a real maintenance nightmare.  What is the problem they
are trying to solve that requires 5 identical sets of binaries under 5
different users, as opposed to (worst case normally), 1 set of binaries and
5 instances?

On Jan 2, 2008 11:49 PM, Satheesh Babu.S <satheeshbabu.s@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> All,
>  We have been proposed with following architecture by our consultant. I
> need your expert opinion on this.
>
>  Assume a server got 5 database and all the databases running in same
> oracle version and patchset.
> They are proposing to create 5 unix account. Each unix account will have
> one oracle binaries and corresponding oracle DB. Apart from that each unix
> account will have dedicated mountpoints. In broader sense each unix account
> will be logically considered as one server.
>
>  I am slightly worried about this architecture. Because when this
> architecture goes to production, the impact it will have on maintenace going
> to be huge. Assuming i am having minimum 100 db in production( ours is a
> very large shop) and if i need to apply one patch to all these servers going
> to kill us. Secondly, will there be a impact on licensing. I don't think so,
> but like to check it up with you guys. I know it has got some advantage too.
> But is this approach is suitable for large shop like us?
>
> Regards,
> Satheesh Babu.S
> Bangalore
>



-- 
Andrew W. Kerber

'If at first you dont succeed, dont take up skydiving.'

Other related posts: