RE: New database servers...one listener or one for each database.

From: Uzzell, Stephan <SUzzell_at_MICROS.COM>
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 15:32:26 +0000
Message-ID: <1fac9b6fa7494703b2b785b4705d7c6f_at_USMAIL2K1304.us.micros.int>

We topped out at 7 DBs on a RAC, and we use a single listener for all of them. Outside of some “interesting” behaviors in some of the earlier 11g patchsets on Windows, we’ve never had an issue with the listeners.

I would probably just go with one listener personally, for ease of use.

Stephan Uzzell | Senior Database Administrator | Managed Services |MICROS Systems, Inc. Direct: 443.285.8000x2345 | Mobile: 443.864.1725 | suzzell_at_micros.com<mailto:suzzell_at_micros.com> | www.micros.com<blocked::http://www.micros.com>

From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org [mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org] On Behalf Of Chris Grabowy Sent: Monday, 14 July, 2014 11:27
To: oracle-l_at_freelists.org
Subject: New database servers...one listener or one for each database.

So were migrating all the production databases to new Red Hat servers.

The question being debated by the DBAs is…

• One listener for all the databases (1-10) on the server?
• One listener per database, different ports, on the server?

One listener for the server keeps things simple all the way around but could be a single point of failure.

One listener for each database kinda complicates things but reduces it as a single point of failure for all the databases on the server.

Is there an Oracle recommendation? Have sites had problems with the listener?

Thanks,
Chris

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

Received on Mon Jul 14 2014 - 17:32:26 CEST