Re: 30 instances on one host

Niall Litchfield wrote:
>
> "Sean M" <smckeown_at_earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:3D0ECDA9.F4675643_at_earthlink.net...
> > Another example might be a support organization. Each telephone analyst
> > might need a scratch instance to run simple tests on. You have 60
> > analysts. It would not make sense to buy 60 servers to run 60 test
> > instances on. You buy 2 or 3 big ones and run 20 or 30 many small
> > databases on each. Again, peformance takes a back seat to managability
> > and cost, but that's perfectly acceptable and sane - the correct choice
> > for this particular example.
>
> I rather suspect that the 'correct' choice is to equip the support analysts
> with a decent intel machine running win2k as their workstation and install
> Oracle on each workstation.

That doesn't help if they're supporting anything other than Win2k. It also doesn't help much if they need to trash and rebuild all 60 databases overnight with a new set of data, a new release of the database, a new version of the application, a new release of the OS, etc. Again, managability has the higher priority than performance, and that's perfectly OK.

Regards,
Sean Received on Tue Jun 18 2002 - 09:36:36 CDT