Re: Does this happen to you at work?

From: Paul Drake <bdbafh_at_gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 16:15:29 -0400
Message-ID: <910046b405051013156285f99c@mail.gmail.com>

On 5/10/05, david wendelken <davewendelken_at_earthlink.net> wrote:
> >> Consider a database hosting 3 different unrelated applicatons.

>=20


> >Whilst I wouldn't go so far as to say that we would never have such a

> >database, it would be very unlikely.  Far more likely would be three

> >different instances (and associated databases) on the same box, each
> >instance named for the application it hosted.
>=20
> Short of national security concerns, why would you want the extra overhea=
d of two additional database instances instead of just using three schemas = in one instance?

These come to mind:
1. use of public synonyms in packaged apps. 2. use of overly broad sys_privs in an application role, e.g. select any ta= ble
3. differences in availability: maintenance windows, uptime agreements, patchset frequency
4. lack of point in time tablespace recovery in Standard Edition 5. lack of consensus by a matrix management of application owners on what color the database should be.

Paul

--=20
#/etc/init.d/init.cssd stop
# f=3Dma, divide by 1, convert to moles.

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

Received on Tue May 10 2005 - 16:19:59 CDT