Re: 30 instances on one host

Sean M wrote:

> Patrick Meyer wrote:
> >
> > "Daniel Morgan" <damorgan_at_exesolutions.com> wrote in message
> > >
> > > Yes. Because I have lots of servers with two or three databases and one
> > > instance. And there isn't any OPS or RAC in sight.
> > > Daniel Morgan
> >
> > Now I am confused. One instance for multiple databases? I thought with
> > OPS or RAC, you had multiple instances for one database, but there was
> > no way possible to have multiple databases for one instance.
> >
> > I must have fallen asleep the day they covered that.
> >
> > (Your not getting confused with SQL Server are you?)
>
> I could be misinterpreting Daniel, but I think he's still talking about
> a 1-to-1 relationship between instance and database, but that he's only
> running a subset of his databases at one time. So the host has, say, 6
> databases on it, but only 3 of which are actualy instantiated at any
> given point (the others are just shutdown, not consuming any resources
> other than disk space).
>
> Regards,
> Sean M

I've never talked about a 1:1 relationship between databases and instances. The CREATE DATABASE command has a parameter for MAX INSTANCES.

I just wasn't sure that, while trying to follow the thread and learn from the rest of you, that you were all talking about the same thing. Some seemed to use the word instance in the technically correct manner while others were using it to mean instance. And no one seemed to notice or care except this poor soul who was hanging onto every keystroke.

I've had lots of servers with multiple databases. But multiple instances on one machine? A few times but I've never felt good about it.

Daniel Morgan Received on Thu Jun 20 2002 - 18:23:14 CDT