"Paul Brewer" <paul_at_paul.brewers.org.uk> wrote in message news:<3e94d10c$1_1_at_mk-nntp-1.news.uk.worldonline.com>...
> >
> > 8) Some applications require the schema owner to have DBA
>
> Just picking up on one point here. Which applications? Why?
> Why does the schema owner need any privileges (as opposed to quota) at all?
>
At least two of our apps run by connecting to Oracle with the schema name
(the actual end-users do not have Oracle accounts).
Their documentation says the schema account requires the DBA role.
At this point, I don't know exactly why. I know the apps will create
new tables, indexes, views, etc, based on end-user requests, but this
alone should not require the DBA role. I guess I should ask the vendors'
Tech Support to explain why the DBA role is required, but I'm not overly
optimistic the answer will prove that the DBA role is not required.
Since more than one vendor stated the same requirement,
I have been assuming these vendors, and others, have developed
applications that require granting the DBA role to the schema owner.
In our shop, each purchased app is supported by a primary and secondary
developer, and both usually have access to that schema password.
They would then have the ability to view or modify the data of every
other application in the instance.
..Rick
Received on Thu Apr 10 2003 - 01:13:22 CDT
