RE: Multiple schema's or multiple databases
In 8.1.x, as long as your schemas have their own tablespaces, you could to TSPITR (Tablespace Point in Time Recovery). Diana Duncan TITAN Technology Partners One Copley Parkway, Ste 540 Morrisville, NC 27560 VM: 919.466.7337 x 316 F: 919.466.7427 E: [EMAIL PROTECTED] John Lewis jlewis@punchnetTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED] works.com cc: Sent by:Fax to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: Multiple schema's or multiple databases 05/22/2001 07:36 PM Please respond to ORACLE-L Something to ponder. The archive logs are tied to the system. Thus, if you want to recover to a point in time for a multi-schema /one instance system, if one schema gets rolled back - everything gets rolled back. We had this same issue. Perhaps someone knows a way around this. -Original Message- From: Christopher Spence [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 2:26 PM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Subject: RE: Multiple schema's or multiple databases 1. Is that performance gain absolutely necessary? What happens if one company goes down and takes down them all. On another note, I tend to agree on lesser instances against more instances. Easier to tune, better perforamance due to what I call instance wastage and much easier to maintain. But if one system changes alot, has significiantly different access methods, or goes up and down more than anyone, I would evaluate seperate instances. -Original Message- From: Sam Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 1:41 PM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Subject: Multiple schema's or multiple databases Oracle 8.1.6 and Solaris I'm going to inherit production databases when I start my new job next week. I gather that the production database consists of 8 schema's (8 companies) that are all in one database. Its an ERP package called Maximo and it interfaces to Financials 11i databases (don't know if this is multiple databases or schema's yet). Apparently there is some data passing between companies and multiple schema's perform better than using database links with multiple databases, and this is the reason for multiple schema's. Does anyone have an opinion on this. If I'd have done it I would have done multiple databases as they are separate companies, but I'm open to comments as not quite got my head round it yet, plus I've been vacationing (partying) for 3 weeks. Thanx Sam -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051 San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
Re: Multiple schema's or multiple databases
If each schema has it's own tablespace, then you can do Point In Time Tablespace Recovery. If all schemas share tablespaces then that would be a problem. Richard Ji [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/23/01 02:45AM Off the top of my head I can see this problem also. Is there anyone who is expert at recovery has a view. Dick - how can you consolidate 8 companies into one schema - they probably all have different inventories,equipmet etc.. + all have their own interface to Oracle Financials. Sam - Original Message - From: John Lewis To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 3:36 AM Subject: RE: Multiple schema's or multiple databases Something to ponder. The archive logs are tied to the system. Thus, if you want to recover to a point in time for a multi-schema /one instance system, if one schema gets rolled back - everything gets rolled back. We had this same issue. Perhaps someone knows a way around this. -Original Message- From: Christopher Spence [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 2:26 PM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Subject: RE: Multiple schema's or multiple databases 1. Is that performance gain absolutely necessary? What happens if one company goes down and takes down them all. On another note, I tend to agree on lesser instances against more instances. Easier to tune, better perforamance due to what I call instance wastage and much easier to maintain. But if one system changes alot, has significiantly different access methods, or goes up and down more than anyone, I would evaluate seperate instances. -Original Message- From: Sam Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 1:41 PM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Subject: Multiple schema's or multiple databases Oracle 8.1.6 and Solaris I'm going to inherit production databases when I start my new job next week. I gather that the production database consists of 8 schema's (8 companies) that are all in one database. Its an ERP package called Maximo and it interfaces to Financials 11i databases (don't know if this is multiple databases or schema's yet). Apparently there is some data passing between companies and multiple schema's perform better than using database links with multiple databases, and this is the reason for multiple schema's. Does anyone have an opinion on this. If I'd have done it I would have done multiple databases as they are separate companies, but I'm open to comments as not quite got my head round it yet, plus I've been vacationing (partying) for 3 weeks. Thanx Sam -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Richard Ji INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051 San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
Multiple schema's or multiple databases
Oracle 8.1.6 and Solaris I'm going to inherit production databases when I start my new job next week. I gather that the production database consists of 8 schema's (8 companies) that are all in one database. Its an ERP package called Maximo and it interfaces to Financials 11i databases (don't know if this is multiple databases or schema's yet). Apparently there is some data passing between companies and multiple schema's perform better than using database links with multiple databases, and this is the reason for multiple schema's. Does anyone have an opinion on this. If I'd have done it I would have done multiple databases as they are separate companies, but I'm open to comments as not quite got my head round it yet, plus I've been vacationing (partying) for 3 weeks. Thanx Sam
RE: Multiple schema's or multiple databases
1. Is that performance gain absolutely necessary? What happens if one company goes down and takes down them all. On another note, I tend to agree on lesser instances against more instances. Easier to tune, better perforamance due to what I call instance wastage and much easier to maintain. But if one system changes alot, has significiantly different access methods, or goes up and down more than anyone, I would evaluate seperate instances. -Original Message-From: Sam Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 1:41 PMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: Multiple schema's or multiple databases Oracle 8.1.6 and Solaris I'm going to inherit production databases when I start my new job next week. I gather that the production database consists of 8 schema's (8 companies) that are all in one database. Its an ERP package called Maximo and it interfaces to Financials 11i databases (don't know if this is multiple databases or schema's yet). Apparently there is some data passing between companies and multiple schema's perform better than using database links with multiple databases, and this is the reason for multiple schema's. Does anyone have an opinion on this. If I'd have done it I would have done multiple databases as they are separate companies, but I'm open to comments as not quite got my head round it yet, plus I've been vacationing (partying) for 3 weeks. Thanx Sam
Re: Multiple schema's or multiple databases
Off the top of my head I can see this problem also. Is there anyone who is expert at recovery has a view. Dick - how can you consolidate 8 companies into one schema - they probably all have different inventories,equipmet etc.. + all have their own interface to Oracle Financials. Sam - Original Message - From: John Lewis To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 3:36 AM Subject: RE: Multiple schema's or multiple databases Something to ponder. The archive logs are tied to the system. Thus, if you want torecover to a point in time for a multi-schema /one instance system, if one schema gets rolled back - everything gets rolled back. We had this same issue. Perhaps someone knows a way around this. -Original Message-From: Christopher Spence [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 2:26 PMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: RE: Multiple schema's or multiple databases 1. Is that performance gain absolutely necessary? What happens if one company goes down and takes down them all. On another note, I tend to agree on lesser instances against more instances. Easier to tune, better perforamance due to what I call instance wastage and much easier to maintain. But if one system changes alot, has significiantly different access methods, or goes up and down more than anyone, I would evaluate seperate instances. -Original Message-From: Sam Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 1:41 PMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: Multiple schema's or multiple databases Oracle 8.1.6 and Solaris I'm going to inherit production databases when I start my new job next week. I gather that the production database consists of 8 schema's (8 companies) that are all in one database. Its an ERP package called Maximo and it interfaces to Financials 11i databases (don't know if this is multiple databases or schema's yet). Apparently there is some data passing between companies and multiple schema's perform better than using database links with multiple databases, and this is the reason for multiple schema's. Does anyone have an opinion on this. If I'd have done it I would have done multiple databases as they are separate companies, but I'm open to comments as not quite got my head round it yet, plus I've been vacationing (partying) for 3 weeks. Thanx Sam
