Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid

Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> Re: two databases in a server

Re: two databases in a server

From: David Aldridge <>
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 12:54:24 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <>

My tuppence worth ...

Putting lots of applications in a single database per server is a fine principle, but there are two very clear red flags:

i) Application vendor support, particularly with regard to versions/patches ii) Disparate database types: DSS and OLTP for example, where tuning goals do not align.

In practice, I think that this means that the candidates for single database treatment are ...

i) in-house developments where you are responsible for your own support ii) applications that make minimal use of DB vendors' specific features (and which are thus less likely to be patch and version-level sensitive) ie. the dreaded database-agnostic app.

Hi Tom,   

 These are two extreme.
  30 servers with two DB's - too much efforts unless proper software management/deployment method plus monitoring is implemented. Having 30 DB's on single machine is another extreme because one going "crazy" will impact others. Monitoring can be also a bit more difficult in this case. Also big machines with many DBs and many disks are less stable and boot time can be quite high in case it goes down or needs to be rebooted. I would prefer in this case something in the middle - like 5 machines each hosting 6 DBs. Here you can flexibility to group them to get more convenient maintenance windows as well as limit system outage impact.    


 2006/3/30, <>:   Michael,

What you say is the reason the PC as database server revolution is slowly dieing out. Many servers means many licenses. One large server means one larger license. There is a significant cost savings.

And as you said, manageability. I would much rather manage 30 databases on one server than thirty servers and thirty databases.

Separate Oracle Homes where needed, and we are in business!



Best regards,
Alex Gorbachev

-- Received on Thu Mar 30 2006 - 14:54:24 CST

Original text of this message