I agree with your comment on pricing Jeff. I’m dating myself here, but I view
this as similar to how Oracle used to charge for the procedural option. It
wasn’t long before PL/SQL was bundled into the database offering.
That should happen with multi-tenant as well if Oracle’s direction is to try
and force us to use it. As you may have guessed by my age comment, I have way
too many scripts that would need modification to use PDBs.
With that said, I’m all for technology enhancements and new functionality. That
is what has kept me in this industry this long. I just don’t see the benefit in
investing a lot of time in moving to a technology my company wouldn’t purchase
anyway.
Steve Givens
Sr Systems Engineer
First National Bank of Omaha
________________________________
From: Jeff Chirco <backseatdba@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: August 30, 2018 at 11:42:44 AM CDT
To: oracle-l-freelist <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [External] Re: Create 12c or 18c database in traditional architecture
I'ved asked this question over the last couple year to various consultants and
I think on here once. It seemed like the majority of response I got where that
people where still doing the non-CDB traditional install in Production. I went
with traditional install for a few reasons
1. In the beginning of testing NetApp storage snaps didn't support PDBs or
12.2. They do now
2. I wanted to go to 12c quicker than taking the time to learn multitenancy
3. Plus we are migrating from Windows to Linux and
11.2.0.4<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__11.2.0.4&d=DwQFaQ&c=LkAXfnqL6_MvrMPL5JzdE3Ild0DUTpmjbCJvMv5_TcQ&r=p64P693r52tzs7tJCmFvOg&m=h-tXL_0zepeBDg4pmabjEFurxmUpJWIGilMNWn3sugE&s=SgynsvS5qgjgv6Y-YG4Tm5r1xZRVTFlxTND4UR7aWrc&e=>
to 12.2.01 at the same time so wanted to limit the amount of things changing
and learning at once.
4. We have 4 databases running on this one server and I just though it was
silly to have 4 CDBs with 1 PDB each. Maybe this isn't, I don't know.
I really feel that Multitenancy should be included at no cost. If they want to
de-support traditional install and force us this route it should be included.
Like someone said MSSQL already has this. Or drop the price. $17,500 per cpu
is crazy. If they want use to use it and promote it, it needs to be included
or cheap enough that it is a no-brainier.
Jeff
On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 11:25 PM Juan Miranda
<jmirandavigo@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jmirandavigo@xxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Totally agree.
More cost and more complex administration; just what we need.
-----Mensaje original-----
De: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>] En
nombre de Mladen Gogala
Enviado el: miércoles, 29 de agosto de 2018 17:11
Para: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Asunto: Re: Create 12c or 18c database in traditional architecture
Hi Neil!
Multi-tenant doesn't make any sense because the resources it will save
are much, much cheaper than the cost of the multi-tenant option. Also,
the competitors (DB2, SQL Server, SAP Hana) are all allowing creation of
additional databases for free. I don't see why would I need to pay for
the same feature with Oracle?
Regards
On 08/29/2018 09:23 AM, Neil Chandler wrote:
Personally I think multi-tenant a decent feature but it is cost
prohibitive for what you get in return.
