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

Or remember how nested tables (whoever thought that was a good idea?) were a separate license as well? Gartner was all over it -" Oracle is finally moving in an object oriented direction. These features will save the database!" Or words to that effect.

Jay Miller
Sr. Oracle DBA
201.369.8355

-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org [mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org] On Behalf Of Givens, Steven Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2018 2:04 PM
To: backseatdba_at_gmail.com; oracle-l-freelist Subject: Re: Re: Create 12c or 18c database in traditional architecture

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.

That should happen with multi-tenant as well if Oracle's direction is to try and force us to use it. As you may have guessed by my age comment, I have way too many scripts that would need modification to use PDBs.

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.

I really feel that Multitenancy should be included at no cost. If they want to de-support traditional install and force us this route it should be included. Like someone said MSSQL already has this. Or drop the price. $17,500 per cpu is crazy. If they want use to use it and promote it, it needs to be included or cheap enough that it is a no-brainier.

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

--
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.freelists.org_webpage_oracle-2Dl-5Bfreelists.org-5D&d=DwIF-g&c=nulvIAQnC0yOOjC0e0NVa8TOcyq9jNhjZ156R-JJU10&r=aiKV3Uv2Wo7GqYQcis9TSvB1MZslPOnintrOY1rjG58&m=GFIhk0g9jdRZX1bPt1jQTee54n2NfKd0GbiJirrjM5I&s=mAcTTWEXQaU8zD9Y7BlfRWxQAaW9QEVG48JFp2kUpk0&e=<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=>


--
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.freelists.org_webpage_oracle-2Dl&d=DwIF-g&c=nulvIAQnC0yOOjC0e0NVa8TOcyq9jNhjZ156R-JJU10&r=aiKV3Uv2Wo7GqYQcis9TSvB1MZslPOnintrOY1rjG58&m=GFIhk0g9jdRZX1bPt1jQTee54n2NfKd0GbiJirrjM5I&s=31QcxvFi5UxIBpufxdm1ZpKXnTl0z4tWaza0K6onSoI&e=


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