Re: second instance

From: Richard Bentley <krb_at_unixa.nerc-keyworth.ac.uk>
Date: 1997/01/29
Message-ID: <5cn3fe$stp@kwuz.nerc-keyworth.ac.uk>#1/1

>From "Tim Nimmo" <nimmo_at_primenet.com>
>Newsgroups: comp.databases.oracle.server
>Subject: Re: second instance
>Date: 26 Jan 1997 02:29:01 -0700

>Craig Walters <waltersc_at_mail.dec.com> wrote in article
<01bc0ad1$ea68a360$59204810_at_WaltersC1>...
>> Hello all,
>> Can someone list possible areas of concern (technical and operational)
>> regarding the implementation of a second Oracle instance on NT 3.51?
>>
>> Also state whether there is any difference between a second instance on
an
>> Intel platform versus an Alpha (both NT 3.51).
>>
>> Thanks for any help rendered.

>> craig
>

>1) None
>2) Hell, yes. Alpha is MUCH faster than Intel! <g>

>Really though. If you have the resource (memory and disk) to run another
>Oracle instance, then by all means go ahead.

>Tim...

I agree with that. We used to run two instances on an HP UNIX box. (all you need to do is the change the SID before you restart the install). However you double the SGA (tens of Megabytes of memory) and you need two system tablespaces, two temporary tables, two rollback tablespaces, (we use massive tables so the latter were each 500M bytes each ) two sets of archive logs etc.
Then you need four backup systems (exports and physical file dumps for each) thus doubling the number of tapes required for daily/weekly/monthy saves. It was all too much and we reverted to one d/b in the end.

Richard Bentley
Natural Environment Research Council,
Oxfordshire, England. Received on Wed Jan 29 1997 - 00:00:00 CST