Re: same application on multiple schemas
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 10:25:07 -0700 (PDT)
On Apr 14, 7:49 pm, Michael Austin <maus..._at_firstdbasource.com> wrote:
> Palooka wrote:
> > Forgive me if I am speaking out of turn.
You are forgiven. :-) (don't worry, be usenet)
> > Quite seriously, as far as Oracle is concerned, fsck FGAC, or even
> > separate schemas. If I am dealing with multiple customers, each will
> > have his own database. They might well be on the same server, though.
> > Palooka
> The difference, however is available memory for SGA space. If I need 10
> databases with an SGA of 5G (yeah rather large for most stuff), then I
> need a minimum of 50GB+free memory for things like - say - the OS and
> database connections. If I have separate schema, then I only need one
> very large SGA/process counts etc... to handle those same 10
> databases/1000 users. VPD/FGAC is a way around it, but, like anything
> in Oracle, YMMV and test, test test and test some more...
Yeah, here it comes down to SLA (service level agreements). All it takes is one screwy customer with partitioning, bitmaps and RACkilling customization to send people scurrying around trying to get the resource limitations right. It winds up being easier to map separate databases to customers, and these days with virtualization all the rage, it's very attractive for management to just give 'em their own.
Going back to the timeshare days, it's always turned out to be more difficult to maintain profitability running multiple customers as the technology evolves, than anyone will admit. Maybe this time will be different, rather than trying to amortize costs across customers, make customers pay costs.
-- _at_home.com is bogus. Using linux suspicious behavior: http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/04/14/193217Received on Wed Apr 15 2009 - 12:25:07 CDT