From oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org Thu Jul 7 06:46:20 2005 Return-Path: Received: from air891.startdedicated.com (root@localhost) by orafaq.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j67BkKLl009470 for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 06:46:20 -0500 X-ClientAddr: 206.53.239.180 Received: from turing.freelists.org (freelists-180.iquest.net [206.53.239.180]) by air891.startdedicated.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j67BkEIP009453 for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 06:46:14 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id B6C931C859A; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 06:46:07 -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 10726-10; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 06:46:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 3FD871C8654; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 06:46:07 -0500 (EST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis Subject: RE: VPD vs multiple schems vs multiple instance Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 07:44:20 -0400 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: VPD vs multiple schems vs multiple instance Thread-Index: AcWCdMwU4JvlEGcjSz64ZjCJDyzCIQAdDVHw From: "Mercadante, Thomas F (LABOR)" To: , Cc: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Jul 2005 11:44:21.0075 (UTC) FILETIME=[36F20A30:01C582E9] X-archive-position: 22161 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org Errors-To: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org X-original-sender: Thomas.Mercadante@labor.state.ny.us Precedence: normal Reply-To: Thomas.Mercadante@labor.state.ny.us X-list: oracle-l X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p9 (Debian) at avenirtech.net X-mailscan-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mailscan-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on air891.startdedicated.com X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=2.63 One more reason to keep them separate: Recovery. What if one client needs the database rolled back? If you have one instance, they are all screwed. Sure, you can do something with Tablespace Point in time recovery. But why make it harder than it needs to be? Keep them in separate instances. -----Original Message----- From: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of Dennis Williams Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 5:50 PM To: dubey.sandeep@gmail.com Cc: oracle-l@freelists.org Subject: Re: VPD vs multiple schems vs multiple instance Sandeep I would advocate separate instances for the following reasons: 1. Easier security. 2. When downtime is required, easier to meet each client's needs. 3. When Oracle needs patched or upgraded, easier to deal with each client. 4. If you decide to move a client to another server, easily done. For example, one client insists an Oracle patch be applied immediately. Another client insists that they can't possibly accept the downtime required. With a single instance, you are forced to choose between clients. With separate instances you can treat clients independently. There are advantages to a single instance from a shared pool perspective. However, in my experience the frustrations outweigh that gain. Dennis Williams -- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l -- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l