Hi Ludovico > Hello Hans, > > > I feel the *potential* extra discussion and failure points introduced by > > multi-tenant is probably outside the mandate of RAC Attack. > > I see your point and it makes sense to me after a deeper reflexion. If others > agree, I'll modify the book to get a standard, non-cdb database. It's up to the entire team. I'm enthusiastic about CDB but I know it's caused me some double takes and I really believe it could be a major distraction to the RAC Attack > Moreover it will be simpler. Nothing prevents fearless attendees to try this > option themselves: it's the last step in the installation flow. > :-) > > Ludovico Caldara > Consultant > Infrastructure Managed Services > > trivadis AG > Rue Marterey 5 > CH-1005 Lausanne > > Phone +41-58 459 54 54 > Fax +41-21-321 47 01 > Mobile +41-79-909 72 75 > ludovico.caldara@xxxxxxxxxxxx > www.trivadis.com > > Da: racattack-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [racattack-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] per conto > di Hans Forbrich [hans@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Inviato: mercoledì 14 agosto 2013 16.27 > A: racattack@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > Oggetto: [racattack] Re: racattack and multitenant... > > Apologies for the wording - it was strictly 'in context of multi-tenant', > since that was the discussion in that thread. Losing the context makes a > horrifying jump. > > I meant specifically the 'hands-on for multi-tenant'. > > IMHO, mandate of RAC Attack is to allow hands-on of core RAC to get people to > a basic operating environment, so they can feel comfortable going home and > recommending install of Oracle RAC as a fairly simple and robust alternative, > *regardless of the OS they have back in their office*. > > Since there are a large number of subtle differences between CDB and non-CDB > environments (for example "sqlplus / as sysdba" access the root, with > restrictions such as "create user abc" will fail..whereas "create user > c##abc" will not, and a whole host of other low-level surprises), I feel the > *potential* extra discussion and failure points introduced by multi-tenant is > probably outside the mandate of RAC Attack. > > I could, however, be easily convinced of the need for MTAttack > (Multi-Tenant), since MT and the surprising subtle differences is one of the > topics I will present in DOAG. > > > Hans > > On 14/08/2013 7:43 AM, Yury Velikanov wrote: >> >> However, I do ask whether doing the hands-on is within the current >> >> 'mandate' of RAC Attack? >> May I ask you what do you mean by "hands-on" and what do you think the >> current mandate is? >> >> >> Best Regards, >> >> Yury Velikanov >> Oracle ACE Director & Team Technical Lead >> Pythian - Love your data >> >> velikanovs@xxxxxxxxxxx | Twitter: @yvelik | Linkedin >> Tel: +1 613 565 8696 x 1277 >> www.pythian.com AboutMe >> >> >> On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 11:39 PM, Hans Forbrich <hans@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >>> Multi-tenant opens up a whole new set of opportunities and issues. >>> >>> I like the idea of demonstrating the CDB and PDB concept, and will be >>> willing to discuss that at OOW. >>> >>> However, I do ask whether doing the hands-on is within the current >>> 'mandate' of RAC Attack? >>> >>> /Hans >>> >>> >>> On 14/08/2013 5:49 AM, Ludovico Caldara wrote: >>>> Hello %, >>>> >>>> Just a little note, in the wikibook I've completed the database creation >>>> with "enable pluggable database", because I assume that most attendants >>>> will be eager to try something related to this feature running in a RAC >>>> environment. >>>> By consequence, some labs about services and load balancing will involve a >>>> PDB rather than a non-cdb instance. >>>> >>>> If you think that it's a bad idea, I'm open to change it! :-) >>>> >>>> Best regards >>>> >>>> Ludovico Caldara >>>> Consultant >>>> Infrastructure Managed Services >>>> >>>> trivadis AG >>>> Rue Marterey 5 >>>> CH-1005 Lausanne >>>> >>>> Phone +41-58 459 54 54 >>>> Fax +41-21-321 47 01 >>>> Mobile +41-79-909 72 75 >>>> ludovico.caldara@xxxxxxxxxxxx >>>> www.trivadis.com >> >> >> -- >> >