Re: DB12c in Production?
From: Hans Forbrich <fuzzy.graybeard_at_gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 18 May 2014 22:24:06 -0600
Message-ID: <53798766.9060907_at_gmail.com>
On 18/05/2014 6:18 PM, Iggy Fernandez wrote:
>
> What are the advantages of using a CDB with a single pluggable
> database (as appears to be allowed without extra cost when using
> Enterprise Edition) instead of a non-CDB?
>
> Iggy
Date: Sun, 18 May 2014 22:24:06 -0600
Message-ID: <53798766.9060907_at_gmail.com>
On 18/05/2014 6:18 PM, Iggy Fernandez wrote:
>
> What are the advantages of using a CDB with a single pluggable
> database (as appears to be allowed without extra cost when using
> Enterprise Edition) instead of a non-CDB?
>
> Iggy
Biggest advantage is getting used to the new architecture - the older architecture is officially known as "pre-12c" and based on that terminology we suspect it will phase out.
My experience is that we need to plan at least 6 months getting adjusted to the CDB concept and fixing scripts, etc. Switch is not going to be a cake-walk, so the sooner we start looking at it seriously ...
Other than that, it gives a whole new way of thinking about and handling backups, migrations, duplications, PITR, etc. - think 'transportable database' to get started.
I suspect we have not begun to see the tip of this iceberg.
/Hans
-- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-lReceived on Mon May 19 2014 - 06:24:06 CEST