Re: OEMGC and Standard Edition?
- From: Gus Spier <gus.spier@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: kjped1313@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 5 May 2010 12:03:05 -0400
Ahh! I knew there was a reason for all the artifact, legacy suites of
scripts we've inherited.
Our problem is that the previous incumbents became "overwhelmed" as they
downsized and transitioned ... leaving a situation for a new gang of dbas to
paw through and evaluate between than 1k mail messages carping about
"check_alert_logs" and "find_oracle_zombies"
After too many months, we finally have the beast trimmed down to less than
20 emails a day ... mostly dealing with a script that someone else owns.
Thanks,
Gus
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 2:40 PM, Kellyn Pedersen <kjped1313@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Anyone else wish Oracle sales reps would STOP pushing OEM so much? I
> talked my last contract gig out of the OEM, to downgrade them to standard
> edition to everything but one database to save on licensing costs and then
> set up with a "sweet suite" of shell scripts to monitor everything with one
> file for email addresses to manage. Had scripts to check the scripts server
> availability and monitoring and all was right with the world...
>
> Sigh, it works so much better than editing xml and conf files all the
> time... :)
> Kellyn Pedersen
> Sr. Database Administrator
> I-Behavior Inc.
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/kellynpedersen
> www.dbakevlar.blogspot.com
>
> "Go away before I replace you with a very small and efficient shell
> script..."
>
>
> --- On *Tue, 5/4/10, Jared Still <jkstill@xxxxxxxxx>* wrote:
>
>
> From: Jared Still <jkstill@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: OEMGC and Standard Edition?
> To: Brandon.Allen@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: "tim@xxxxxxxxx" <tim@xxxxxxxxx>, "oracle-l" <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Tuesday, May 4, 2010, 9:35 AM
>
>
>
> On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Allen, Brandon
> <Brandon.Allen@xxxxxxxxxxx<http://us.mc1145.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=Brandon.Allen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
>
>> I manage all my scheduled tasks through cron and monitoring/alerting
>> through very efficient and reliable scripts, which I guess qualifies me as
>> what Oracle calls a “DBA 1.0” these days.
>>
>>
> Same here.
>
> Have you seen the DBA 1.0 vs. DBA 2.0 "demo" at Open World last year?
>
>
>
Other related posts:
