Rick, I would consider defining small based on something other than size.
eg perhaps some combination of: small means less critical (ie small business loss if data is unavailable or lost forever) small means small number of concurrent users small means don't need extremely quick response times small means small uptime requirements small means small need for features (eg replication / standby / failover etc) Maybe you could consider implementing "small" databases as schemas within a single Oracle database and use MS Access front-ends via ODBC? Hope this gives some ideas for thought. Cheers, Bruce Reardon -----Original Message----- Sent: Wednesday, 11 December 2002 8:15 AM Hi, We are virtually an Oracle shop with 2-3 sql server databases due to 3rd-party software restrictions. We have been asked about supporting other "small" databases such as Access,etc within our company. My question is if you were asked to support "smaller" databases what restrictions/guidelines/standards are worth considering? Be kind-constructive answers only :-) Thanks Rick -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Reardon, Bruce (CALBBAY) INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com San Diego, California -- Mailing list and web hosting services --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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).
