Re: 30 instances on one host

Daniel Morgan wrote:
>
> I agree. But you are changing terminology in midstream to make your point. You are
> talking databases. The original question related to instances. They are not the same
> thing.
 

OK, fine, Daniel you're absolutely correct. A database is not an instance. However, just about every DBA I know uses the terms interchangably when OPS/RAC is not in the picture. It's lazy maybe, but that's the way it is. If I got sloppy and started using the words interchangably, I apologize. However, my argument stands as is, with the word "instance" anywhere I happened to use the word "database" lazily. I did not "change terminology in midstream to make my point." If I changed terminology, it was just sloppiness. My point stands.

> And I specifically in my posting that you responded to made a point of
> differentiating in case there was a misuse of terminology.
>
> 10+ databases I can understand. 10+ instances? No but I'm open to persuasion if
> someone can make a good case.

20+ instances, corresponding to 20+ databases, on a single host in an education/support/testing/development environment *can* be justifiable and sound, under the right circumstances. Please use the example of a training class provided above and let me know why you have trouble with the idea.

Regards,
Sean M Received on Thu Jun 20 2002 - 09:59:00 CDT