Re: Net8 Naming Methods - Which One?

"Rowan McCammon" <rowan.mccammon_at_macquarie.com.au> wrote in message news:MPG.143d2679a5b13f68989683_at_news...
> Hi All,
>
> We're trying to work out the optimal method to deploy the Net8 client.
> The main issue we are debating is the naming method.
>
> For example:
> Do we have a centralised tnsnames.ora? Do we use existing infrastructure,
> eg. NDS or NIS?
>
> Wondering if anyone has found any "idiosyncracies" in the various naming
> methods that Oracle offer? Or have any "war stories" you'd like to tell
> me about?
>
> Any input appreciated.
>

the answer, of course, is it depends. i've used both the TNSNAMES.ORA at all client machines and the Oracle Name server.

i find that a local TNSNAMES.ORA on each client machine is a simple and straightforward configuration. the downside is that changes to the TNSNAMES file must be made at all of the client machines, and this can be a real nuisance.

the benefit of the Oracle Names server is that you don't have to maintain a local copy of TNSNAMES.ORA on each client machine. the downside is that you have to maintain the names server(s) and the clients machines are dependent on the availability of the Names server(s). the additional overhead (network traffic) is negligible.

Net8 introduced "host" naming, which appears to be an even simpler and easier configuration, if you can live with the restrictions and limitations .

war stories? we had several development groups deploying applications, each group deploying it's own flavor of TNSNAMES.ORA, which overlaid any existing TNSNAMES.ORA. and inevitably, the versions shipped with each application
omitted entries required by already installed applications. as you can imagine, the support calls went like 'the application doesn't work', 'did you get an error message?', 'i don't remember', 'has anything changed on your machine?', 'no'... Introducing the Names server didn't totally fix the problem because some of the applications were deploying SQLNET.ORA files.

My recommendation (for what it's worth) is to use a Names server.

>
> Regards,
> Rowan.
>
>
>
Received on Wed Sep 27 2000 - 20:04:37 CDT