Re: local naming vs directory naming
- From: "Rich Jesse" <rjoralist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "oracle-l-freelists" <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 8 May 2008 11:25:22 -0500 (CDT)
Li, what ever you do, thoroughly investigate what it will take for you to
get to OID and what benefits you intend to reap from it.
In addition to "standard" Oracle backups and OID replication, I found it
very helpful to do regular LDAP-based backups (e.g. using ldapsearch to a
text file). It made the recovery plan for human-based fcrew ups *much*
simpler!
FWIW, I have documented the convoluted contortions that found were required
to manually install replicated OID in an existing DB. Search for "OID" at
http://wiki.oracle.com While it's not a trivial undertaking, I'd still
prefer it over the DBCA. :)
GL!
Rich
[snipped quoting follows]
> 2. No, directory naming has nothing to do with the contents of your AD
> directory. There was a time when Oracle supporting directory naming
> using AD as the repository--there's a good reason they no longer support
> it--it plain didn't work in most of the cases where I tried. There's no
> reason to sync AD with OID either. The OID data you're considering
> storing for naming has no benefit to being stored in AD. You'll
> obviously want to back up your OID data via normal database backup
> methods, but that's about as concerned as you should need to be.
>
> Dan
>
> Li Li wrote:
>> Hi List,
>>
>> Anybody using directory naming here?
>>
>> Any help or pointing me to the correct document to read would be
>> greatly appreciated!
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Li
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
