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

There are a few SQL Server features for the user database architecture that can compare with multi-tenant features.
-DBCC_Clone database will create, meta data only, read only, (2014,2016) and read/write databases, (2017).
-At the lower cost of SQL Server, you can easily add Redgate SQL Clone and or SQL Provision for advanced automation, as Microsoft has a tendency to leave advanced features to their partners. -Multiple container technologies- docker, AKS, Kubernetes, etc. are available for all tiers of the stack.
-Data Factory in Azure can function with onprem or cloud implementations with kafka, Hadoop or older ETL tools to process data in just about any fashion needed to one or more sources.

I'm not as up to date on MySQL, so someone else will have to answer that one... :)

[image: Kellyn Pot'Vin on about.me]

*Kellyn Pot'Vin-Gorman*
DBAKevlar Blog <http://dbakevlar.com>
President Denver SQL Server User Group <http://denversql.org/> about.me/dbakevlar

On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 12:59 PM MacGregor, Ian A. <ian_at_slac.stanford.edu> wrote:

> Thank you, there has been a case where Oracle made a paid for option
> free. Before Oracle 6 there was the Transaction Processing Option which
> at extra cost provided the row level locking and non-blocking of
> readers which is now standard. If you already had TPO you received the
> Procedural Option at no cost.
>
>
> One might compare the mult-tenant option with the TPO if Oracle is going
> to support one architecture
>
>
> UFI-ally
>
>
>
>
> Ian A. MacGregor
> SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory
> Computing Division
> To offer the best IT service at the lab and be the IT provider of choice.
> ------------------------------
> *From:* oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org <oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org> on
> behalf of Tim Hall <tim_at_oracle-base.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, August 31, 2018 3:48:44 AM
> *To:* Oracle-L Freelists
> *Subject:* Re: Create 12c or 18c database in traditional architecture
>
> Not getting into the better/worse debate, but there is a lot of
> functionality associated with the multitenant architecture that I
> don't believe is present with MySQL and SQL Server, although I'm not
> the best DBA for MySQL and SQL Server, so I'm happy to be corrected.
> Off the top of my head:
>
> - Hot clones (local and remote).
> - Relocate (near zero-downtime).
> - Refreshable PDBs.
> - Proxy PDBs.
> - Metadata-only clones.
> - Running commands/queries across all databases.
> - Application containers for holding shared applications used by all
> other databases. Can be centralised using proxies.
> - A bunch of resource management at the PDB level.
>
> I'm not saying you want or care about this, but hot clones are great
> and so much easier than RMAN duplicates. All but the last three in
> this list are really useful in lone-PDB also, so you don't have to pay
> cash to get some of the benefits.
>
> I agree that this should be included in the existing licenses, or at
> the least an EE feature, rather than an extra paid for option. Several
> people including myself have suggested that even a small number for
> free, like 5 for free and pay for more, would make it lots more
> attractive. Despite this, I still find it very useful a lone-PDB, but
> a lot will depend on what you do.
>
> This is not directed at any individual, but I hope people have spent
> some significant time learning this before they make judgements. As
> I've mentioned numerous times, I hated it and thought it was stupid
> when I first started looking at it. I really didn't get the point of
> lone-PDB either. After investing time learning it and using it in real
> scenarios I really like it, and when I start working on non-CDB
> instances it irritates me. :) Other opinions are valid. :)
>
> Cheers
>
> Tim...
> --
> http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
>
>

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