Re: two databases in a server
- From: David Aldridge <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Oracle List <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 12:54:24 -0800 (PST)
My tuppence worth ...
Putting lots of applications in a single database per server is a fine
principle, but there are two very clear red flags:
i) Application vendor support, particularly with regard to versions/patches
ii) Disparate database types: DSS and OLTP for example, where tuning goals do
not align.
In practice, I think that this means that the candidates for single database
treatment are ...
i) in-house developments where you are responsible for your own support
ii) applications that make minimal use of DB vendors' specific features (and
which are thus less likely to be patch and version-level sensitive) ie. the
dreaded database-agnostic app.
----- Original Message ----
From: Alex Gorbachev <gorbyx@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Thomas.Mercadante@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: MFontana@xxxxxxxxx; roger_xu@xxxxxxxxxxx; "Oracle-L@Freelists. Org
(E-mail)" <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 1:42:09 PM
Subject: Re: two databases in a server
Hi Tom,
These are two extreme.
30 servers with two DB's - too much efforts unless proper software
management/deployment method plus monitoring is implemented. Having 30 DB's on
single machine is another extreme because one going "crazy" will impact others.
Monitoring can be also a bit more difficult in this case. Also big machines
with many DBs and many disks are less stable and boot time can be quite high in
case it goes down or needs to be rebooted. I would prefer in this case
something in the middle - like 5 machines each hosting 6 DBs. Here you can
flexibility to group them to get more convenient maintenance windows as well as
limit system outage impact.
Cheers,
Alex
2006/3/30, oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
Michael,
What you say is the reason the PC as database server revolution is
slowly dieing out. Many servers means many licenses. One large server
means one larger license. There is a significant cost savings.
And as you said, manageability. I would much rather manage 30 databases
on one server than thirty servers and thirty databases.
Separate Oracle Homes where needed, and we are in business!
Tom
--
Best regards,
Alex Gorbachev
Other related posts:
