Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid |
![]() |
![]() |
Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: DB Structure Oracle compared to SQL Server
On Feb 15, 11:50 am, DA Morgan <damor..._at_psoug.org> wrote:
> euan.gar..._at_gmail.com wrote:
> > On Feb 14, 11:01 am, DA Morgan <damor..._at_psoug.org> wrote:
> >> Robert Klemme wrote:
> >>> On 14.02.2007 10:51, sybrandb wrote:
> >>>> What is the business case for 4 databases? Oracle != sqlserver, a
> >>>> *schema* in Oracle is a *database* in sqlserver. You don't need 4
> >>>> databases.
> >>> I am in doubt whether this is still true withSQL Server2005.
> >> It is!
> >> --
> >> Daniel A. Morgan
> >> University of Washington
> >> damor..._at_x.washington.edu
> >> (replace x with u to respond)
> >> Puget Sound Oracle Users Groupwww.psoug.org
>> > ways and like a database in other ways. The schema answer is easy, the
> > Close but wrong. A schema in SQL Server 2005 is like a schema in
> > Oracle, a database in Oracle is like an instance in SQL Server in some
>
I can think of one business reason for 4 databases (Oracle usage). You'd like to maintain the schema names across DEV, QA, STAGING, and PRODBAK instances without having to edit scripts for permissions/ grants each time you migrate object scripts. You might have all 4 instances on one machine due to a lack or resources to purchase more hardware.
You can do this with schemas, but you have to be extra careful with those grants.
More of the shops I've been in have one instance per machine with a DEV, QA, and STAGING instance on each.
Just a thought.
Roger Gorden Received on Thu Feb 15 2007 - 13:28:08 CST
![]() |
![]() |