Re: Multiple schema's or multiple databases

From: Sam Roberts <rabbit_at_emirates.net.ae>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 22:35:26 -0700
Message-ID: <F001.0030BB66.20010522224540@fatcity.com>

Off the top of my head I can see this problem also. Is there anyone who is expert at recovery has a view. Dick - how can you consolidate 8 companies into one schema - they probably all have different inventories,equipmet etc.. + all have their own interface to Oracle Financials.
 
Sam
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">

• Original Message ----- <DIV style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">From: John Lewis To: <A href="mailto:ORACLE-L_at_fatcity.com" title=ORACLE-L_at_fatcity.com>Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 3:36 AM Subject: RE: Multiple schema's or multiple databases

  <SPAN
  class=803062622-22052001>Something to ponder. The archive logs are tied to the   system. Thus, if you want to recover to <FONT color=#0000ff   face=Arial size=2>a point in time for a   multi-schema /one instance system, i<FONT color=#0000ff   face=Arial size=2>f one schema gets rolled back

• everything gets rolled back. <SPAN class=803062622-22052001>  We had this same issue.  Perhaps someone knows a way around this.

<FONT face=Tahoma

    size=2>-----Original Message-----From: Christopher Spence     [mailto:cspence_at_FuelSpot.com]Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 2:26     PMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: RE:     Multiple schema's or multiple databases
<FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial

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

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

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

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

    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 Wed May 23 2001 - 00:35:26 CDT