Re: Dumb question about Users & Instances

Daniel Morgan <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote in message news:<1067524322.303719_at_yasure>...
> Answers in-line.
>
> zoetosis wrote:
>
> >I know this is a dumb question but not being a dba I can't find a quick
> >answer to it.
> >
> Why? Don't you have a DBA? Who set i tup? Who is managing it?
>
> >On a machine running 3 instances are the users in one instance totally
> >independent of those in another?
> >
> Yes. But it is not much different from them being in separate schemas.
>
> >I've just been told that a client deleted a user in one instance and that
> >that user disappeared from the other two instances as well.
> >
> Nonsense unless replication is in place. And total nonsense if anyone is
> giving "a client" the privilege
> to delete a schema. That's just plain ridiculous.
>
> >I always thought that the user "fred" could be created in each of the
> >instances but that each user was specific to the instance in which they were
> >created, is this correct?
> >
> >Thanks
> >
> >Neil
> >
> >
> You thought correctly. So my guess is that someone has instituted some
> form of
> replication.
>
> But it still leaves open the question of who is responsible for this
> mess? And why the
> apparently intense desire to violate good security practices. Well good
> practices period
> as I can't find anything in your posting the justifies having more than
> a single instance.

There is also the possibility of the user being deleted from the operating system. Prevents the user from getting into the machine, let alone into another instance in ORACLE. So it all goes back to the question: what is meant by "deleted a user"?

Ed Received on Fri Oct 31 2003 - 14:45:09 CST