Re: tnsManager Vs OID
- From: Jared Still <jkstill@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: Richard.Goulet@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 08:30:38 -0700
Ditto.
Oracle Names was indeed superior to OID for naming purposes.
Jared Still
Certifiable Oracle DBA and Part Time Perl Evangelist
Oracle Blog: http://jkstill.blogspot.com
Home Page: http://jaredstill.com
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 5:43 AM, Goulet, Richard <Richard.Goulet@xxxxxxxxxxx
> wrote:
> They did, it was called ONames till some BOZO convinced them that LDAP
> was the future.
>
>
> *Dick Goulet***
> Senior Oracle DBA/NA Team Lead
> PAREXEL International
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
> oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *~Jeff~
> *Sent:* Sunday, October 25, 2009 3:52 AM
> *To:* sundarmahadevan82@xxxxxxxxx; Oracle-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Subject:* Re: tnsManager Vs OID
>
> tnsManager just uses a tnsnames.ora file , no database required.
>
> Its a shame Oracle didn't make OID so elegantly simple!
>
>
> 2009/10/25 sundar mahadevan <sundarmahadevan82@xxxxxxxxx>
>
>> From Alan's reply, Am I correct in understanding that OID requires an
>> oracle database for names resolution. But with respect to tnsManager,
>> I do not think it requires a database.
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 7:28 PM, Guillermo Alan Bort
>> <cicciuxdba@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > Plus you get the basic memory footprint of an Oracle Database... I don't
>> > reckon you will need much memory... but at least 200MB...
>> >
>> > cheers.
>> > Alan Bort
>> > Oracle Certified Professional
>> --
>> //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>>
>>
>>
>
Other related posts:
