RE: veritas
- From: "Matthew Zito" <mzito@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "Finn Jorgensen" <finn.oracledba@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 14:27:28 -0400
Oh, of course! And it is indeed about everyone's perspective. Without
coming off sounding like a corporate shill (which I am generally not, I
hope), a lot of our customers use our automated patching that's
integrated with Veritas to make having one home per instance a
non-issue, at which point the only extra overhead is the cost of
more-expensive SAN disk space.
But, this also has the advantage that it's actually feasible to easily
patch a subset of databases without patching the whole.
Thanks,
Matt
--
Matthew Zito
Chief Scientist
GridApp Systems
P: 646-452-4090
http://www.gridapp.com <http://www.gridapp.com/>
mzito@xxxxxxxxxxx
________________________________
From: Finn Jorgensen [mailto:finn.oracledba@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 2:24 PM
To: Matthew Zito
Cc: joe_dba@xxxxxxxxxxx; oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: veritas
Matt,
It's different for everybody. In my case I might have 20 databases on
each node and the ability to fail each individually between the nodes.
If they're all the same Oracle version then your solution would require
20 different oracle homes with all the hassles of patching etc that
comes with that. No one solution is perfect. You have to pick one that
has the least problems for you. They all have some amount of problems.
IMO of course.
Finn
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 2:20 PM, Matthew Zito <mzito@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Having an Oracle_home on each node is ill-advised in my opinion. It is
too easy, and I have seen it happen far too many times, that something
happens to the passive node's ORACLE_HOME that is only discovered when a
failover event occurs. Having one ORACLE_HOME that is on the SAN and
shared between nodes is ideal
Other related posts:
