RE: Multiple schema's or multiple databases

<FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff

size=2>1.  Is that performance gain absolutely necessary?
<FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff

size=2> 
What
happens if one company goes down and takes down them all.
<FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff

size=2> 
<FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff

size=2> 
On
another note, I tend to agree on lesser instances against more instances.  Easier to tune, better perforamance due to what I call instance wastage and much easier to maintain.  But if one system changes alot, has significiantly different access methods, or goes up and down more than anyone, I would evaluate seperate instances.
 

  <FONT face=Tahoma
  size=2>-----Original Message-----From: Sam Roberts   [mailto:rabbit_at_emirates.net.ae]Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 1:41   PMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject:   Multiple schema's or multiple databases   Oracle 8.1.6 and Solaris
  I'm going to inherit production databases when I start my   new job next week. I gather that the production database consists of 8   schema's (8 companies) that are all in one database. Its an ERP package called   Maximo and it interfaces to Financials 11i databases (don't know if this is   multiple databases or schema's yet).
  Apparently there is some data passing between companies and   multiple schema's perform better than using database links with multiple   databases, and this is the reason for multiple schema's.   Does anyone have an opinion on this. If I'd have done it I   would have done multiple databases as they are separate companies, but I'm   open to comments as not quite got my head round it yet, plus I've been   vacationing (partying) for 3 weeks.
   
  Thanx
   
  Sam
  <FONT
size=2>  Received on Tue May 22 2001 - 17:04:14 CDT