Re: One vs many databases

I never understood why somebody sensible with technical know how, would like many databases instead of one.

I have seen a billing system of a big telecom company they made a seperate database for every big table, call the crap "distributed databases, this is cool" and it is very good, very good in employing 100 dba and up to now produced 1 billion euro cost.

so the answer to this is "someone sensible and knowledgeable " would never prefer many databases instead of one.

the only reason for many databases the usage of standard software which forces you to seperate your databases and use different oracle versions.

but with home made software the best this is to integrate everything into one big
db with 9.2 and make some standby databases on different places to protect it

sometimes people tell you, if the thing is to big it is difficult to manage. but this people have no real oracle knowledge , at how much more difficult is
it to manage seperate databases instead of one.

for the problems with big data volumes we have today big hardware and I used a technique to seperate the historical data through partitioning into a seperate
partition and used the compress option in 9.2 and sorted it to "compress" it.
but logical it stays in the same table and everything is simple

people told me the historical data needs to be in a seperate database to keep the working database "fast" but this is also nonsense. If you need the data keep it in the primary database and organize it well, as I did. I you don't need it remove it.

Ask this question Thomas Kyte from Oracle and he will tell you the same. He is one of the few Oracle authorities from which you really can learn, most people in this area have no real knowledge from modern system management. they only want to keep their job and make it as difficult as possible, like this people telling you to reorganize database, indexes ...

Also if it is really necessary you can use RAC to use many servers for one big database, it is still much more simpler than many databases because logical you have only one, but only if you really need it.

"John Hunter" <jthunter_at_nbnet.nospam.nb.ca> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:qufR9.3254$Hs3.402088_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
> Hi Gang,
>
> I'm looking at submitting a business case to management that will justify
> changing from our current structure of many oracle databases to one big
> database. We currently run many separate databases (financial, sales,
> purchases etc...) all based on functional areas. These are all inhouse
> written systems. My problem with having all these instances is with
trying
> to link data together. We need to have realtime data shared amonst the
> systems. Dblinks are quite slow and although materialized views have lots
> to offer they consume a fair amount of overhead.
>
> Anyway, I've done some web searches looking for the pros and cons of many
> instances vs. one instance and have yet to find a good whitepaper on this
> subject. I did read through the long (70 or so posts) when someone said
they
> were going to install 50 instances on one host, but it didn't really
answer
> the question.
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
>
>
>
Received on Fri Jan 03 2003 - 07:28:50 CST