Re: Would you recommend having multiple instances on the same box?

Daniel Morgan <damorgan_at_exesolutions.com> wrote in message news:<3EA1F24B.B1FEE3B1_at_exesolutions.com>...
> Van Messner wrote:
>
> > I have never worked at a site that did not have multiple instances on the
> > same box. The statement not to do that is so outlandish the person who made
> > it probably meant something else. Maybe he meant to say you should usually
> > not have development, test and production instances of the same database on
> > the same box.
> >
> > "John Guthrie" <john_at_guthrie.co.za> wrote in message
> > news:b7luoq$1uot5$1_at_ID-156817.news.dfncis.de...
> > > I know it is possible to have multiple instances running on the same box
> > > but:
> > >
> > > Can someone tell me if their is an official line that says Oracle does NOT
> > > recommend running multiple instances on the same box.
> > >
> > > AND
> > >
> > > Can someone tell me if running multiple instances on the same box is ever
> > > used in 'the real world'?
> > >
> > > The reason for the questions above is that we have made a request to run 2
> > > instances on the same box and this request was denied saying that Oracle
> do
> > > not recommend running more than 1 instance on the same box and that this
> is
> > > not done in 'the real world'. (the box which we will be using is more than
> > > capable of handling 2 instances - spec in this case is not the issue.)
> > >
> > >
>
> I have consulted at many locations where there was a rule against multiple
> production line-of-business instances on the same machine. Among them Boeing and
> AT&T. And I am using the strict Oracle definition of instance.

Would this rule happen to date from when VMS was the primary platform? :-)

(Don't Boeing and AT&T have unlimited use licenses? I don't know, just curious.)

jg

--
@home.com is bogus.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/uniontrib/tue/business/news_1b22prgn.html