Re: Re: Create 12c or 18c database in traditional architecture
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2018 18:04:25 +0000
Message-ID: <21EF323E971F4A8E884E08F25EB2EBBA_at_com.citrix.mail.iOS>
I agree with your comment on pricing Jeff. I’m dating myself here, but I view this as similar to how Oracle used to charge for the procedural option. It wasn’t long before PL/SQL was bundled into the database offering.
With that said, I’m all for technology enhancements and new functionality. That is what has kept me in this industry this long. I just don’t see the benefit in investing a lot of time in moving to a technology my company wouldn’t purchase anyway.
Steve Givens
Sr Systems Engineer
First National Bank of Omaha
From: Jeff Chirco <backseatdba_at_gmail.com> Date: August 30, 2018 at 11:42:44 AM CDT To: oracle-l-freelist <oracle-l_at_freelists.org> Subject: [External] Re: Create 12c or 18c database in traditional architecture
I'ved asked this question over the last couple year to various consultants and I think on here once. It seemed like the majority of response I got where that people where still doing the non-CDB traditional install in Production. I went with traditional install for a few reasons
1. In the beginning of testing NetApp storage snaps didn't support PDBs or 12.2. They do now
2. I wanted to go to 12c quicker than taking the time to learn multitenancy
3. Plus we are migrating from Windows to Linux and 11.2.0.4<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__11.2.0.4&d=DwQFaQ&c=LkAXfnqL6_MvrMPL5JzdE3Ild0DUTpmjbCJvMv5_TcQ&r=p64P693r52tzs7tJCmFvOg&m=h-tXL_0zepeBDg4pmabjEFurxmUpJWIGilMNWn3sugE&s=SgynsvS5qgjgv6Y-YG4Tm5r1xZRVTFlxTND4UR7aWrc&e=> to 12.2.01 at the same time so wanted to limit the amount of things changing and learning at once.
4. We have 4 databases running on this one server and I just though it was silly to have 4 CDBs with 1 PDB each. Maybe this isn't, I don't know.
Jeff
On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 11:25 PM Juan Miranda <jmirandavigo_at_hotmail.com<mailto:jmirandavigo_at_hotmail.com>> wrote:
Totally agree.
More cost and more complex administration; just what we need.
-----Mensaje original-----
De: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org<mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org> [mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org<mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org>] En nombre de Mladen Gogala
Enviado el: miércoles, 29 de agosto de 2018 17:11
Para: oracle-l_at_freelists.org<mailto:oracle-l_at_freelists.org>
Asunto: Re: Create 12c or 18c database in traditional architecture
Hi Neil!
Multi-tenant doesn't make any sense because the resources it will save are much, much cheaper than the cost of the multi-tenant option. Also, the competitors (DB2, SQL Server, SAP Hana) are all allowing creation of additional databases for free. I don't see why would I need to pay for the same feature with Oracle?
Regards
On 08/29/2018 09:23 AM, Neil Chandler wrote:
> Personally I think multi-tenant a decent feature but it is cost
> prohibitive for what you get in return.
-- Mladen Gogala Database Consultant Tel: (347) 321-1217 -- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l[freelists.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.freelists.org_webpage_oracle-2Dl&d=DwMFaQ&c=LkAXfnqL6_MvrMPL5JzdE3Ild0DUTpmjbCJvMv5_TcQ&r=p64P693r52tzs7tJCmFvOg&m=h-tXL_0zepeBDg4pmabjEFurxmUpJWIGilMNWn3sugE&s=ZA53bCQFffavOnz5uuFWsViWO46BiAIrZXOWkIrd3lk&e=> -- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-lReceived on Thu Aug 30 2018 - 20:04:25 CEST