Re: What are the implications of having several instances on a server sharing the oracle home?
- From: Carel-Jan Engel <cjpengel.dbalert@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: rafiq9857@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 22:26:41 +0200
Many instances running on single server, sharing Oracle home, on many
sites.
I must admit I have slightly adapted OFA: My Oracle home naming is like:
/.../oracle/product/DB_09_02_00_05_00.
This is a recent 'development'. It's because 10g asks me to install many
products, and I want every product to be independent from the others:
Grid Control, agents, AS, whatever. Adding extra levels of the version
number to the OH helps to keep them separated, even when one of the
databases (sorry, products) gets patched, and the others will stay
behind for a while. Once every instance/database left an Oracle Home, I
send it to the eternal bitfields.
However, my behaviour is subject to change, if anyone here proves
(points) my individual interpretation of OFA wrong!
Best regards,
Carel-Jan Engel
===
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance. (Derek Bok)
===
On Wed, 2004-09-29 at 20:38, Mohammad Rafiq wrote:
> If sufficient resources are available as you explained, one Oracle
> Home is fine regardless of number of instances. I never seen any
> contention in binaries. In case of upgrades when all instances can not
> be upgraded at one time due vendors restriction/certification, a
> separate Oracle Home can be justified.
>
> Regards
> Rafiq
>
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
