Re: New instance(s) setup question

Bill,

If you have already established you can run on SE2 and you can do the migration (exp/imp)
Why don't you do that now?

For a single socket physical machine you only need 1 license for Standard Edition

Oracle Database Standard Edition 2 (Processor; 1 Year) US$3,500.00 Software Update License and Support (First Year) US$3,850.00

Total: US$7,350.00 (Full list price) for a Termed license with full support.

You would pay US$7,350.00 per year, no up front costs.

That's US$612.5/month

And to simplify things more,
script backup as a shutdown and cold file copy, Any SysAdmin could do a file copy restore. As you said you don't need to be accessible during non-duty hours?

Tom

On Thu, Jun 6, 2019 at 1:03 PM Bill Ferguson <wbfergus_at_gmail.com> wrote:

> :)
>
> Yep, being a Federal employee, I lost count years ago of how many times
> I've been told I was stupid for doing any work over weekends, holidays, or
> other 'after hours' situations.
>
> But I've always looked at it as a salaried job, and I have prescribed work
> plans assigned each year. When other groups like network security, etc. do
> something stupid and time-consuming, I then have to work around those
> obstacles while still trying to keep pace with my workload. And somewhere
> in the mix I'm also supposed to find time to improve things and make
> everything cheaper and more efficient, even though I don't have those hours
> assigned as part of my workload. So, there's really no choice but to do
> work "after hours". But at least I can remote in so I don't have to make
> the 77 mile round trip all the time when I do. :)
>
> And everybody else, thanks for the input. After talking with the SysAdmin
> and discussing how things are looking, at least for right now I think I'll
> go with two separate installations on the same server.
>
> On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 3:37 PM Mark W. Farnham <mwf_at_rsiz.com> wrote:
>
>> <snickering on>
>>
>> If I don't retire next year, that Amazon configuration would limit my
>> ability to do system work over the weekends, but oh well.
>>
>> <snickering off>
>>
>>
>>
>> 1) I bet your bean counter got some dandy meals and so forth
>>
>> 2) Good on yas! (So sorry, I am unable to reach the server remotely
>> on weekends. Thanks for calling and triggering my 4 hour minimum, but I
>> cannot help you until Monday. By the way, why are you accessing the server
>> out of prescribed hours?)
>>
>> mwf
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org [mailto:
>> oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org] *On Behalf Of *Bill Ferguson
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 05, 2019 3:02 PM
>> *To:* Noveljic Nenad
>> *Cc:* oracle-l-freelists
>> *Subject:* Re: New instance(s) setup question
>>
>>
>>
>> Noveljic -
>>
>> First, being in the government, we have a "bean counter" that really
>> doesn't understand Oracle and Oracle sales-people, doing the licensing
>> agreements. Somehow my Center got dinged for 56 cores when we only had 16
>> at that time. We currently have an Unlimited License Agreement for Oracle
>> EE, and three other components (like Advanced security).
>>
>> But when I migrate things to Amazon, I'm going to go with the SE2 option.
>> That alone and using their license, combined with the minimal IO, should
>> keep our costs around $1,000/month. The Amazon configuration I've been
>> looking at would be the db.m1.medium, for 70 hours of uptime (availability)
>> per week. Since we are for internal use only, and US Government, we don't
>> need to be accessible during non-duty hours. That helps on the cost quite a
>> bit also. If I don't retire next year, that Amazon configuration would
>> limit my ability to do system work over the weekends, but oh well.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 10:52 AM Noveljic Nenad <
>> nenad.noveljic_at_vontobel.com> wrote:
>>
>> Bill,
>>
>>
>>
>> Your database server has 4TB of mirrored storage, 4 CPU cores and 32GB
>> RAM. As you mentioned that your licensing fee is $160’000, I’m guessing
>> that you use Enterprise Edition with some expensive options on top of it.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sorry for being nosy, but I couldn’t resist asking how did you manage to
>> get the equivalent PaaS from Amazon for just $1000/month? If you don’t mind
>> asking, are the licenses included in that price as well? Would you happen
>> to know the name of the Amazon class and deployment?
>>
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>>
>>
>> Nenad
>>
>>
>>
>> https://nenadnoveljic.com/blog
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Bill Ferguson <wbfergus_at_gmail.com>
>> *Sent:* Mittwoch, 5. Juni 2019 14:53
>> *To:* Noveljic Nenad <nenad.noveljic_at_vontobel.com>
>> *Cc:* oracle-l-freelists <oracle-l_at_freelists.org>
>> *Subject:* Re: New instance(s) setup question
>>
>>
>>
>> Good points, which I failed to mention in my original post (since I
>> thought it was already overly wordy). The number of people allowed to
>> access the server is a small group of 5 people (most of which will be
>> retiring), and all of the users only access the database(s) through Apex.
>> We may also be migrating to the Amazon cloud later this year, depending on
>> funding, as that should cost us less than $1,000/month, but we are also
>> committed to a current Oracle cost of over $160,000 just for this year, so
>> the bean-counters need to figure out how and where to get the money.
>> Government work is so fun. :)
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 6:47 AM Noveljic Nenad <
>> nenad.noveljic_at_vontobel.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Bill,
>>
>>
>>
>> Having both test and production running on the same hardware, you
>> obviously won’t have a possibility to test the impact of the operating
>> system (OS) patches and upgrades on the databases before applying them in
>> the production environment.
>>
>>
>>
>> You can partially mitigate this problem with the virtualization, where
>> you can patch every guest OS separately. I’ve been using MS Hyper-V (see
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyper-V ) for years and it has proven as a
>> really good virtualization platform for MS SQL Server databases. However, I
>> don’t have any experience with operating Oracle databases on Windows.
>>
>>
>>
>> Another advantage of the virtualization is a better isolation of the
>> production databases from the security point of view. What I mean by that
>> is if the test and production databases are running in the same OS
>> environment people having access to the test databases could abuse some
>> database features or security leaks to gain the access to the production
>> databases.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>>
>>
>> Nenad
>>
>>
>>
>> https://nenadnoveljic.com/blog
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org <oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org> *On
>> Behalf Of *Bill Ferguson
>> *Sent:* Mittwoch, 5. Juni 2019 14:25
>> *To:* oracle-l-freelists <oracle-l_at_freelists.org>
>> *Subject:* New instance(s) setup question
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi all -
>>
>> Probably pretty basic, but a quick question for a new installation.
>> Oracle pricing has really gotten out of hand, and my Center is drastically
>> downsizing everything to save on costs. We also have several security
>> things to address, and multiple people retiring in the next year or so, so
>> we also have an emphasis on getting things simplified and documented for
>> fairly new and inexperienced SysAdmins, DBA and devs.
>>
>> Anyway, the SysAdmin has setup a new server for me to migrate all of the
>> Oracle stuff to. It is an
>>
>> Intel Xeon Silver-4112 2.60 GHz Socket/Processor with four (4) cores and
>> 32 GB of Memory, running Windows Server 2016 Standard.
>>
>>
>>
>> The C: (SYSTEM) drive is a mirrored volume consisting of two 1TB SSD
>> drives with NTFS space of 884 GB. The E: (APP) drive is a mirrored volume
>> consisting of two 4TB SATA Enterprise drives with NTFS space of 3.45 TB.
>>
>> Now my question is How to get Oracle setup on just this one machine, with
>> both my production and development databases. Should I go with two separate
>> installs (instances), or just go with the multi-tenant and have two
>> pluggable databases? The production database is roughly 1GB in size, with
>> maybe 3-4 users per day, and a total of around 150 users, so performance
>> and throughput, I/O, etc. are extremely minimal. But with myself
>> (hopefully) retiring within a year, and my current backup seeming to be out
>> of her league and not being very motivated to pick up the reins and charge
>> ahead, I want to keep as much as I can, as simple as I can (so I have less
>> documentation to write).
>>
>> At this point in time, I don't have much confidence that she'll be up to
>> the task of taking over if I do retire, especially if I pick the more
>> complicated maintenance installation option. So I'm faced with the prospect
>> of two installations, which is what we currently have with two separate
>> servers. Or, I could go with the multi-tenant option and have two pluggable
>> databases. But that approach has me worried about future upgrades, etc.
>> That will add a whole new level of "stuff" she'll have to learn and for me
>> to document. I'm also worried about availability in case somehow the root
>> container gets hosed and she need to perform a reinstall or anything else
>> that would probably bury her technically.
>>
>> Any opinions other than hiring someone with more motivation and more
>> experience? We are a government agency, so hiring somebody with the skills
>> at our pay scale is pretty far-fetched, especially when management doesn't
>> think we deserve what little pay we do get. Thanks.
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> -- Bill Ferguson
>>
>> ____________________________________________________
>>
>> Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
>>
>> Bitte denken Sie an die Umwelt, bevor Sie dieses E-Mail drucken.
>>
>>
>> Important Notice
>> This message is intended only for the individual named. It may contain
>> confidential or privileged information. If you are not the named addressee
>> you should in particular not disseminate, distribute, modify or copy this
>> e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail, if you have
>> received this message by mistake and delete it from your system.
>> Without prejudice to any contractual agreements between you and us which
>> shall prevail in any case, we take it as your authorization to correspond
>> with you by e-mail if you send us messages by e-mail. However, we reserve
>> the right not to execute orders and instructions transmitted by e-mail at
>> any time and without further explanation.
>> E-mail transmission may not be secure or error-free as information could
>> be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete. Also
>> processing of incoming e-mails cannot be guaranteed. All liability of
>> Vontobel Holding Ltd. and any of its affiliates (hereinafter collectively
>> referred to as "Vontobel Group") for any damages resulting from e-mail use
>> is excluded. You are advised that urgent and time sensitive messages should
>> not be sent by e-mail and if verification is required please request a
>> printed version. Please note that all e-mail communications to and from the
>> Vontobel Group are subject to electronic storage and review by Vontobel
>> Group. Unless stated to the contrary and without prejudice to any
>> contractual agreements between you and Vontobel Group which shall prevail
>> in any case, e-mail-communication is for informational purposes only and is
>> not intended as an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any
>> financial instrument or as an official confirmation of any transaction.
>> The legal basis for the processing of your personal data is the
>> legitimate interest to develop a commercial relationship with you, as well
>> as your consent to forward you commercial communications. You can exercise,
>> at any time and under the terms established under current regulation, your
>> rights. If you prefer not to receive any further communications, please
>> contact your client relationship manager if you are a client of Vontobel
>> Group or notify the sender. Please note for an exact reference to the
>> affected group entity the corporate e-mail signature. For further
>> information about data privacy at Vontobel Group please consult
>> www.vontobel.com.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> -- Bill Ferguson
>>
>>
>> Important Notice
>> This message is intended only for the individual named. It may contain
>> confidential or privileged information. If you are not the named addressee
>> you should in particular not disseminate, distribute, modify or copy this
>> e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail, if you have
>> received this message by mistake and delete it from your system.
>> Without prejudice to any contractual agreements between you and us which
>> shall prevail in any case, we take it as your authorization to correspond
>> with you by e-mail if you send us messages by e-mail. However, we reserve
>> the right not to execute orders and instructions transmitted by e-mail at
>> any time and without further explanation.
>> E-mail transmission may not be secure or error-free as information could
>> be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete. Also
>> processing of incoming e-mails cannot be guaranteed. All liability of
>> Vontobel Holding Ltd. and any of its affiliates (hereinafter collectively
>> referred to as "Vontobel Group") for any damages resulting from e-mail use
>> is excluded. You are advised that urgent and time sensitive messages should
>> not be sent by e-mail and if verification is required please request a
>> printed version. Please note that all e-mail communications to and from the
>> Vontobel Group are subject to electronic storage and review by Vontobel
>> Group. Unless stated to the contrary and without prejudice to any
>> contractual agreements between you and Vontobel Group which shall prevail
>> in any case, e-mail-communication is for informational purposes only and is
>> not intended as an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any
>> financial instrument or as an official confirmation of any transaction.
>> The legal basis for the processing of your personal data is the
>> legitimate interest to develop a commercial relationship with you, as well
>> as your consent to forward you commercial communications. You can exercise,
>> at any time and under the terms established under current regulation, your
>> rights. If you prefer not to receive any further communications, please
>> contact your client relationship manager if you are a client of Vontobel
>> Group or notify the sender. Please note for an exact reference to the
>> affected group entity the corporate e-mail signature. For further
>> information about data privacy at Vontobel Group please consult
>> www.vontobel.com.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> -- Bill Ferguson
>>
>
>
> --
> -- Bill Ferguson
>

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