Re: DBA work without console access - possible ?

I agree that everything can be done remotely with a few exceptions that are not worth arguing about. The question is what is meant by "no access". Clearly, if there are share points available for the use by the DBA, An Oracle Agent is configured and running, etc., then there is little need to physically touch the server. Since the original poster did not spell out specifically what access was removed, I attempted to point out some basic DBA tasks that could be impacted, particulary if all access had been yanked.

I think you were a little quick to jump in and label some things as "just untrue" without knowing precisely what access had been yanked. Nonetheless, you did help the original poster by pointing out some useful techniques.

However, this all begs the issue which is that a sysadmin and DBA are having a pissing contest. This is something that does need to be nipped in the bud. As some of the other posters pointed out, a solid working relationship between the sysadmins and DBA does wonders.

"Niall Litchfield" <n-litchfield_at_audit-commission.gov.uk> wrote in message news:8pnhm4$8uc$1_at_soap.pipex.net...
> "Austin Durbin" <adurbin_at_home.com> wrote in message
> news:cUDv5.135416$3E6.1268966_at_news1.alsv1.occa.home.com...
>
> I have to preface what I say here by stating that, like the rest of you, I
> think that the policy of the sysadmin in this case is wrong,period.
 However
> most of what is said here is just untrue
>
> > Cutting off your access impacts more than defining tables, performing
> > imports, exports, etc. It also takes away your ability to monitor the
> > various Oracle log and trace files, your ability to periodically purge
> > archived log files, invoke the lsncntl program, etc..
>
>
Received on Thu Sep 14 2000 - 23:19:06 CDT