Re: same application on multiple schemas
From: Jeremy <jeremy0505_at_gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 18:36:28 +0100
Message-ID: <MPG.244993f51951711a989709_at_News.Individual.NET>
In article <ujLDl.13115$%54.9073_at_nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com>, maustin_at_firstdbasource.com says...>
> Jeremy wrote:
> > In article <M7IDl.4500$im1.4076_at_nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com>,
> > maustin_at_firstdbasource.com says...>
> >> Alberto wrote:
> >>> Hello, I'm designing a new big application.
> >>>
> >>> The application will be instantiated for multiple users. Each
> >>> application must have its own "database", or schema, Oracle speaking.
> >>>
> >> How many users per schema? This "scheme" sounds like a disaster waiting
> >> to happen. Do they need separate schemas or do they need separate
> >> databases instances?
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Why should it be a disaster waiting to happen? Suppose you were
> > providing and appplication for multiple customers on a single database.
> > And suppose one of those customers used the system far more heavily than
> > other customers and it was decided to separate that user on its own
>
> There are CPU/performance governors for that.
>
> > database or server? Having a schema per customer then makes it easy to
> > move it to another location.
>
> or so you think. If you gauge your customers correctly, you will build
> the infrastructure to handle any workload prior to deployment.
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 18:36:28 +0100
Message-ID: <MPG.244993f51951711a989709_at_News.Individual.NET>
In article <ujLDl.13115$%54.9073_at_nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com>, maustin_at_firstdbasource.com says...>
> Jeremy wrote:
> > In article <M7IDl.4500$im1.4076_at_nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com>,
> > maustin_at_firstdbasource.com says...>
> >> Alberto wrote:
> >>> Hello, I'm designing a new big application.
> >>>
> >>> The application will be instantiated for multiple users. Each
> >>> application must have its own "database", or schema, Oracle speaking.
> >>>
> >> How many users per schema? This "scheme" sounds like a disaster waiting
> >> to happen. Do they need separate schemas or do they need separate
> >> databases instances?
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Why should it be a disaster waiting to happen? Suppose you were
> > providing and appplication for multiple customers on a single database.
> > And suppose one of those customers used the system far more heavily than
> > other customers and it was decided to separate that user on its own
>
> There are CPU/performance governors for that.
>
> > database or server? Having a schema per customer then makes it easy to
> > move it to another location.
>
> or so you think. If you gauge your customers correctly, you will build
> the infrastructure to handle any workload prior to deployment.
You may the same app used by a 10 user company or 500 users. A
customer's use may grow far more rapidly than ever anticipated.
>
> > Another valid scenario might be that the
> > customer starts off with the system hosted by a supplier but wishes an
> > option to host on its own environment down the line.
>
> given your initial post,
It wasn't my post, I was just commenting that I can think of a number of sceanrios where it provides great flxeibility - really to counter your "disaster waiting to happen" which I still believe to be OTT.
-- jeremyReceived on Fri Apr 10 2009 - 12:36:28 CDT