Re: Licensing for Grid Control with out management packs

From: Ravi Madabhushanam <>
Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 01:27:22 +0530
Message-ID: <>

Thanks to everyone for all your valuable inputs.

I do accept with your opinions and feel that custom monitoring is always better than EMGC+DiagPack, provided our intention is only to monitor and receive notifications for alerts. From my past experience custom monitoring will work really well. It only needs some to stabilize the process. We were looking at EMGC only as an option to get more effective monitoring. We did tried couple of monitoring tools and none of them seem to fit our requirements. I think I should drop the thought of EMGC for now and go back to my shell scripts :)


On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 11:16 PM, Subodh Deshpande <> wrote:

> hi ravi,
> yes, I support Allen which is better is debatable :)
> having our own scripts and emailing from the server is better option, cause
> sometimes you have more than one reciepents..consider a large organisation
> where OS sysadmin, network admin may be groups like dba groups and they also
> must be made aware dba issues which are related hosts, space on disks/mount
> points, workflow notificaitons using IMAP, network cards etc..
> thanks..subodh
> On 24 May 2010 20:45, Ravi Madabhushanam <>wrote:
>> Hello All,
>> I need a clarification regarding EM Grid Control licensing.
>> As per my knowledge Grid control is not licensed separately. Licensing is
>> done at the target database/component level. Now I've a requirement to
>> monitor multiple 11g databases using Enterprise Manager Grid Control. We
>> have not purchased any monitoring packs like Diagnostics or Tuning including
>> any specific host management packs. In that case can I still use Grid
>> control for basic monitoring of all these databases. Of course I will not be
>> using any management pack related functionality. Even we are considering to
>> turn off these packs in init.ora.
>> Could you all please share your advice on this.
>> Thank you.
>> Regards,
>> Ravi.M
> --
> ==============================
> ==============================

Received on Tue May 25 2010 - 14:57:22 CDT

Original text of this message