Re: Create 12c or 18c database in traditional architecture

I don't think it's just regression tests that matter. It's the fact that all the developers are working with it constantly during the development process, so it's getting a lot of hours over the development process that non-CDB isn't now.

Regarding the regressions, I remember hearing someone say Oracle are keen to get rid of the non-CDB stuff as they currently have to do regression testing on both architectures, so getting rid of non-CDB would halve the amount of testing necessary. Not sure how accurate that was/is, but it sounds reasonable. :)

Cheers

Tim...

On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 2:23 PM Neil Chandler <neil_chandler_at_hotmail.com> wrote:

> Personally I think multi-tenant a decent feature but it is cost
> prohibitive for what you get in return.
>
> There's not enough compelling functional reasons to migrate to the
> single-PDB model... except for 2 items:
>
> 1. What are Oracle using in the Cloud? PDB's. It's only a small
> percentage of the Oracle installed base at present but that will grow and
> become the norm.
> 2. What do Oracles regression tests run against? I don't know the
> answer to this but I suspect that they mostly run against PDB's now. It's
> like the old Block Size argument - which block size should you use (answer:
> 8k only - unless you have a proven case to change size). Oracle regression
> tests run against 8k and 16k block sizes. There are few (if any)
> regressions against 32k block sizes in a normal regression run, although
> that's changing apparently.
>
> I'd imagine its the same with PDB's (and I'm now going to try to find
> out, unless someone on here knows?) If all of the regressions run against
> the multi-tenant code path, you should be using the single-PDB model as
> it'll have fewer bugs.
>
> I see about a 20% adoption rate at my clients of single PDB at the moment,
> and nobody rushing to embrace it except Tim 😎
>
> Neil Chandler
> Database Guy.
> ------------------------------
> *From:* oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org <oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org> on
> behalf of niall.litchfield_at_gmail.com <niall.litchfield_at_gmail.com>
> *Sent:* 29 August 2018 12:21
> *Cc:* ORACLE-L
> *Subject:* Re: Create 12c or 18c database in traditional architecture
>
> Hi Yong
>
> We've gone with the traditional architecture so far, the primary reason
> for this is that administration scripts and utilities that use ORACLE_SID
> and/or TWO_TASK will all require rewriting to ensure they continue to work.
> Frankly, we have an incomplete handle on all the available scripts on our
> several hundred Oracle servers and almost no view of the ad-hoc etc scripts
> that development teams may have placed on our DB servers. Certifying and
> communicating the change is also a not insignificant effort for a pretty
> small Engineering team. That said our aim is definitely to migrate to the
> PDB architecture the 12.2 "family" of releases timescale. We absolutely do
> not want to be in a position where we *have* to move faster than we
> actually can! Similarly, we've not looked yet at FlexASM but we will do in
> a potential feature release.
>
> I don't see single PDB being buggier than the traditional release (I can
> see that there will be bugs around the new features of multi-tenant) and
> its not true that there's no MGMTDB in a traditional architecture (and from
> 12.1.0.2 it will be a single instance pdb ! ).
>
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 5:02 PM Yong Huang <dmarc-noreply_at_freelists.org>
> wrote:
>
> When creating a 12c or 18c database without the multitenancy license, I
> can (1) create the database with one CDB and only one PDB, or (2) create
> the database in the traditional or non-CDB architecture. The advantage of
> (2) is possibly less buggy, less overhead (no mgmtdb on RAC for instance),
> and slightly easier management. But the disadvantage is that Oracle does
> not recommend it and that "(t)he non-CDB architecture was deprecated in
> Oracle Database 12c. It can be desupported and unavailable in a release
> after Oracle Database 19c."
>
> Short of a formal survey, I'd like to know which option you all have
> chosen. Thank you!
>
> Yong Huang
>
>
>
> --
> Niall Litchfield
> Oracle DBA
> http://www.orawin.info
>

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