RE: Inheriting a "interesting" recovery process

Personally, I prefer the datafiles at the same level as ORACLE_BASE or higher. When I upgrade or install a new version, I don't have to worry about juggling the datafiles around to a new location before I delete the old binaries.

I'm probably missing something though on why it's defined the way it is, but that's my preference.

                               Bill Ferguson
            U.S. Geological Survey - Minerals Information Team
                           PO Box 25046, MS-750
                           Denver Federal Center
                          Denver, Colorado 80225
           Voice (303)236-8747 ext. 321     Fax   (303)236-4208
      ~ Think on a grand scale, start to implement on a small scale ~

Hemant K Chitale <hkchital_at_singnet.com.sg> Sent by: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org
08/08/2006 08:38 AM
Please respond to
hkchital_at_singnet.com.sg

To
Paul.Vincent_at_uce.ac.uk, <oracle-l_at_freelists.org> cc

Subject
RE: Inheriting a "interesting" recovery process

I don't understand how putting ORADATA under ORACLE_BASE is "Flexible" in any way.

Hemant

At 09:56 PM Tuesday, Paul Vincent wrote:
>Well, let's see...
>
>Oracle Database Installation Guide, 10g Release 2 (10.2) for Microsoft
>Windows (32-Bit) B14316-02. Appendix C, Optimal Flexible Architecture.
>Page C-5, in the section "OFA Directory Naming Conventions":
>
>"ORADATA Directory
>
>Database files are stored in ORACLE_BASE\oradata\DB_NAME. Names and
>brief descriptions are:

Hemant K Chitale
http://web.singnet.com.sg/~hkchital

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l



--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l