If you want fine grained accounting and resource scheduling for your instances on solaris 10 boxes, then the novel way would be using Solaris containers for Oracle. This is supported for non-RAC databases only though (AFAIK). http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/features/articles/db_in_containers.jsp http://www.sun.com/third-party/global/oracle/consolidation/Containers_Oracle _041305.pdf -- Regards, Tanel Poder http://blog.tanelpoder.com <http://blog.tanelpoder.com/> _____ From: Tanel Poder [mailto:tanel.poder.003@xxxxxxx] Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 00:06 To: 'oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx' Subject: RE: Server Architecture One good reason for separate sets of binaries is patching and patch testing on one database without affecting others. Having all installations under different Unix users (and also groups in this case!) may be better for security but will make the everyday maintenance, refreshes etc probably harder... as you'll have various problems with permissioning and file access, need to constantly su between users, chmod/chown files etc... that's unless you want to chmod 777 all your directories & files, which would heavily go against the security principles again. I know quite many shops which use a separate software installation (and set of database directories) for each database and it works well. You need to do more manual work for applying patches for all software installations (unless you use automatic provisioning of some sort), but you win in flexibility to patch/upgrade only selected databased in the server instead of all. Regarding different users for each database - this may be useful if you want fine-grained separation of duties - by database. However this approach will be useless if all your DBAs have access to all accounts anyway, in this case you will just make your life harder without gaining any benefit. So you should figure out if you really need all your Oracle installations under different unix usernames and whether the benefit outweighs the maintenance overhead.