From oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org Thu May 13 03:46:19 2004 Return-Path: Received: from air189.startdedicated.com (root@localhost) by orafaq.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i4D8jpW08143 for ; Thu, 13 May 2004 03:46:01 -0500 X-ClientAddr: 206.53.239.180 Received: from turing.freelists.org (freelists-180.iquest.net [206.53.239.180]) by air189.startdedicated.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i4D8jV608095 for ; Thu, 13 May 2004 03:45:51 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 14ACD72CA40; Thu, 13 May 2004 03:35:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 17332-95; Thu, 13 May 2004 03:35:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 49E3872C864; Thu, 13 May 2004 03:35:14 -0500 (EST) Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list oracle-l); Thu, 13 May 2004 03:33:57 -0500 (EST) X-Original-To: oracle-l@freelists.org Delivered-To: oracle-l@freelists.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 1CE8972C841 for ; Thu, 13 May 2004 03:33:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 17493-39 for ; Thu, 13 May 2004 03:33:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from ddbcinc.com (unknown [216.222.6.50]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 6C0AA72C7CD for ; Thu, 13 May 2004 03:33:56 -0500 (EST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.6944.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: RE: Software vendor using additional schemas for testing! Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 02:52:37 -0600 Message-ID: <87E9F113CEF1D211A4C30090273018742BC966@ddbcinc.ddbc.local> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Software vendor using additional schemas for testing! thread-index: AcQ4wqxnJBhwLnENTN+V3wQ22yXfUgAAnQeg From: "Justin Cave (DDBC)" To: X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at freelists.org X-archive-position: 468 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org Errors-To: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org X-original-sender: jcave@ddbcinc.com Precedence: normal Reply-To: oracle-l@freelists.org X-list: oracle-l X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at freelists.org Wow, That is one screwy software vendor. Three distinct database environments is the minimum for any sort of semi industry standard configuration. =20 One tack I would take is that Oracle will be desupporting 8.1.7 at the end of the year, so you'll probably be doing a database upgrade in the near future. You need to have different environments to be able to test an upgrade and you need to test an upgrade thoroughly before rolling it into production. Having dev & test on the same database makes tuning significantly more difficult, since many parameters need to be set at a database level, so you have no way to test them out before applying them to production. Having dev & test on the same machine also has performance implications-- if you're testing in QA, you're putting load on the system that may interfere with production-- a very bad thing. ------------------ Original message, formatting fixed ------------------- OK guys, need some help and ammunition here, so a bit of background first. I'm in my 3rd week in a new job where they are have a 3rd party financials app sitting on 8.1.7 on win2k. Software vendor is coming in today to make some changes. They've never had any in-house DBA skills and have relied solely on 3rd parties. No Oracle support contract (I'm working on getting this changed!). No DBA contract with 3rd party, only chargeable, ad-hoc work. So, they've talked about getting the data in the test/dev databases refreshed, far as I can see they only have one database. Turns out they have one database with three separate schemas. To refresh data, 3rd party has done export/import between the schemas. I've tried explaining that this is not ideal and that=20 really they need a separate test system, but they don't understand. Absolutely no database knowledge in here, and it would seem that even the software vendor is lacking in this department. (Just to demonstrate, 3 redo log groups, 1 member per group size 1M, all sat in same location, 2 copies of controlfile, in same location - get the drift??) The work the software vendor is coming in to do is create 6 new schemas as a way of providing 6 different=20 'staging areas' where copies of the live data can be kept at different points in time to help through year end. Once year end is completed they think they can use these 'staging areas' for testing enhancements. I can't look on Metalink, as no CSI number. I'm about to look at OTN and go RTFM's, which I only got today. What I would like, and quickly is some strong arguments as to why it should not be done this way and alternatives to suggest. I've already mentioned creating a dedicated test database. I've so far managed to hold off on the software vendor beginning work, but I now need to justify this to my manager and to the software vendor.=20 TIA Lisa. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request@freelists.org put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line. -- Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/ FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html -----------------------------------------------------------------