I believe what David was saying is that if you have two Remedy servers pointing at the same DB, then the only supported method of doing that is with a server group. The reason behind this is that is the only way to ensure that the servers don't step on each other. And Remedy doesn't support two Remedy servers located on the same machine, in a server group (the only supported way to point both to the same db). So in short....you can't do what you are trying to do. If you want multiple Remedy's pointing to the same DB, they need to be on separate machines, if you want them on the same machine, you need to point them to separate DB's.
-----Original Message----- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Icarus4 Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2008 4:01 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Multiple Instance of ARS 6.3 on Shared database There is no server group. It is another ARS instance on the same hardware box sharing one single database. I'm just wondering if performance would be better if we separate all admin duties on a separate instance. I know it will not change the fact that database objects will be locked during edition by the admin instance and that the other instance will have to wait, but I thought maybe server resources would be used more efficiently this way. That's the kind of comparison I'm looking for. We currently don't have a dev box where I could perform some load testings that would show something. Easter, David wrote: > >> Instances will share the same database. > > One thing to consider is that "sharing the same database" appears to > imply that you'll be putting both instances into the same server group > - and server groups aren't supported for multiple instances on the > same physical server. > > -David J. Easter > Sr. Product Manager, Solution Strategy and Development BMC Software, > Inc. > > The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed > in this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc. > My voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a > role as a spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for > BMC Software, Inc. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Icarus4 > Sent: Friday, September 12, 2008 6:05 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Multiple Instance of ARS 6.3 on Shared database > > Hello listers, > > I'm considering installing multiple instance of ARS 6.3 on the same box. > Instances will share the same database. > > Anyone did a performance comparison between single and multiple > instances? > Does it bring a better usage of the server resources? > > Thanks for sharing. > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/Multiple-Instance-of-ARS-6.3-on-Shared-database- > tp > 19414834p19414834.html > Sent from the ARS (Action Request System) mailing list archive at > Nabble.com. > > ______________________________________________________________________ > __ > _______ > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum > Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" > > ______________________________________________________________________ > _________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org > Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Multiple-Instance-of-ARS-6.3-on-Shared-database-tp1941 4834p19508803.html Sent from the ARS (Action Request System) mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ____________________________________________________________________________ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
