Re: 30 instances on one host

I hate to weigh in on this, because I'm on the wrong side of the fence. It's not my choice, mind you, but it's where I'm at. It seems that one of the latest buzzwords in the hardware industry is Server Consolidation.

That has been taken to the extreme here. So, upper management, against our advice, purchased an IBM P680 with 12 processors
(upgradable to 24) and 12 Gb memory. They also purchased a couple of EMC
Symmetrix frames for storage. They call this box 'The Consolidated Oracle Database Server'.

Plans are to move between 10 - 20 production databases to this server. The idea is to get rid of numerous smaller servers to ease the server groups management effort and to get rid of the maintenance costs of those numerous other servers.

As part of this same effort, I am consolidating some of those databases into a single database where it makes sense. Unfortunately we get stuck in the Third Party trap where vendors upgrade their applications at different intervals, so they require different versions of Oracle.

As I said, I fought against this effort and lost. I even posted to this group for arguements against it. I got a number of replies, the most to the point was Sybrand saying "You're going to Hell and you know it." Unfortunately, most of the replies only said "it's a bad idea" or "performance will suffer". I tried my best, but the vendor's Sales and Marketing groups won the battle.

In any case, I just wanted to provide an example of where multiple production databases live on one server.

(Before you respond, let me get into my flameproof suit.)

Patrick

-- 
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG