RE: 10g show stoppers

  • From: "Mercadante, Thomas F" <thomas.mercadante@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "'oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'" <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 13:51:39 -0400

Besides what Pete said, you should have a separate OH for patches to make
sure they work as expected.  This separate OH is called "The Development
Database Server".

A different machine from the production server.

Tom Mercadante
Oracle Certified Professional


-----Original Message-----
From: Pete Sharman [mailto:peter.sharman@xxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Friday, July 02, 2004 1:41 PM
To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Peter Ross Sharman
Subject: RE: 10g show stoppers


Sorry, that doesn't make it for me.  ASM is part of the kernel.  If we plac=
ed every part of the kernel in a separate home just in case patches affecte=
d other parts of the kernel, we'd have to have a LOT of ORACLE_HOME's!  :) =
=


If an ASM patch causes problems with other parts of the kernel, it's a bug =
and should be logged as such.  The overhead I mentioned before doesn't seem=
(to me anyway) to warrant a separate install just in case that occurs.  Ot=
hers, of course, may (and usually do!) have different opinions.

 =

Pete
 =

"Controlling developers is like herding cats."
Kevin Loney, Oracle DBA Handbook
 =

"Oh no, it's not.  It's much harder than that!"
Bruce Pihlamae, long-term Oracle DBA

-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] =
On Behalf Of Rognes, Sten
Sent: Saturday, 3 July 2004 2:34 AM
To: 'oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'
Subject: RE: 10g show stoppers


>> ASM is part of the database kernel - if you want you can run the ASM 
>> instance and the DB instance using ASM from the same software home.
Still=3D
>> I'd think most would want to maintain separate software homes for ASM
and=3D
>> databases.

>Forgive my obtuseness (it is after all 2 am and I haven't had my first
coff=3D
>ee yet), but why would you want to do this?  All I can see this causing 
>is=

=3D
>additional overhead in terms of two sets of software to maintain, 
>install
a=3D
>nd so on.  I can't see a single benefit to this.

Say you have to apply a patch to fix an ASM specific problem. Having a
separate OH for the ASM instance you wouldn't have to test/worry about what=

impact the ASM patch would have on your database. =



Sten
----------------------------------------------------------------
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe send email to:  oracle-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx put
'unsubscribe' in the subject line.
--
Archives are at //www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/
FAQ is at //www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------


----------------------------------------------------------------
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe send email to:  oracle-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx put
'unsubscribe' in the subject line.
--
Archives are at //www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/
FAQ is at //www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe send email to:  oracle-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.
--
Archives are at //www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/
FAQ is at //www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Other related posts: