Re: Oracle installation on Local disk vs. SAN

From: <>
Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 21:46:42 +0000

In my past company, we installed every patch level, of couse that doesn't help with interim patches. Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

-----Original Message-----
From: "Matthew Zito" <>

Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 17:44:17
To: <>; Oracle-L Freelists<> Subject: RE: Oracle installation on Local disk vs. SAN

I have both extremes - customers with 100+ instances running out of one ORACLE_HOME, and customers that deploy one ORACLE_HOME for every instance. We typically recommend the latter configuration, especially for production environments, as it removes the, "Well, I don't want you to apply that patch to *my* database" coupled with "But I *have* to get that patch applied to *my* database" between two users sharing the same oracle_home.

Plus it allows you to do better privilege separation by running different databases as different OS users.


Matthew Zito
Chief Scientist
GridApp Systems
P: 646-452-4090

-----Original Message-----
From: on behalf of April Sims Sent: Thu 5/14/2009 4:00 PM
To: Oracle-L Freelists
Subject: Re: Oracle installation on Local disk vs. SAN  


Is there any physical limits you would be up against? The number of instances per ORACLE_HOME?

April Sims
SELECT IOUG Contributing Editor
OCP 8i, 9i, 10g DBA
Southern Utah University

>>> William Wagman <> 5/14/2009 1:30 PM >>>

We have just purchased a new very large SAN to which we will be migrating several databases. There are also two new servers which will be connected to this SAN. We will be running RHEL5 and Oracle 11g. We are in the midst of a discussion with the system administrator who wants us to install Oracle on the SAN rather than the local disk on the new server. We, the DBAs would like to have it installed on the local disk, of which there is plenty.

We are wondering about the pros and cons of installing Oracle on the local disk versus the SAN. All comments appreciated.


Bill Wagman
Univ. of California at Davis
IET Campus Data Center
(530) 754-6208



Received on Thu May 14 2009 - 16:46:42 CDT

Original text of this message