Re: Shared pool Memory question.

I don't understand this one--

I thought (not having read the original question yet-- see what happens when you decide not to go online for a few days!). Oracle does charge by CPU as well as by server (meaning box) as well as by some mystical power factor as well as by simultaneous connections or by named users, multiplied by Pi and divided 32 ft/sec/sec, added to the KWHr the data center uses, adjusted for leap year as well as days elapsed since the Norman Invasion of 1066 and your latitude and longitude.

More than once instance on a box might make sense for shops who can't afford multiple boxes for development and test and production, realizing of course if a developer pulls some boneheaded stunt that sucks all the CPU up, or absorbs all the /tmp and /usr/tmp space (always a job when people do a SPOOL and don't realize where they're sitting) and production goes into a snit. But because Oracle pricing also figures in the capacity of the box in terms of # of CPU's, etc, I don't think there is any single simple answer.

Sorry for picking on Oracle's pricing astrology; I've just found from years of experience to tell the AE or usually just whoever I deal with in CA to read the PR, and "just tell me what all this will cost us, PLEASE DON'T EXPLAIN IT TO ME!, I just need numbers so we can push the paperwork through!"

Which has led to some amusing lunches and dinners over the years with Oracle AE's; "We usually don't get a $300K order and find out because it's been processed and we're getting a commission, can we at least take you out to dinner and meet you?" 'Oh sure, you can schmooze me ex post facto if you like, I've got time this week for it.'

RSH. "Dave Henderson" <dave_at_oracle-consultant.co.uk> wrote in message news:3db0aa40.0203241055.6121df5f_at_posting.google.com...
> > I'm still waiting to hear a "good" reason to put more than one instance
on a
> > single server. I do not consider management pinching pennies to be a
good reason.
>
> Licensing costs would be one reason. If you're licensing per CPU,
> adding another server can be very costly.
Received on Mon Mar 25 2002 - 11:29:43 CST