May 3, 2009 at 7:23 am
I had A HRMS Database
Is it necessary to maintain the HRMS_MASTER,HRMS_TRANS,HRMS_HISTORY DATABASES
i.e., one HRMS DATABASE split into 3 databases(HRMS_MASTER,HRMS_TRANS,HRMS_HISTORY)
Give me the reason for why we have to maintain 3 databases
In case of we have not maintained 3 databases(i.e., one HRMS database)
IS THERE ANY Performance dicrease will occur?
Is it correct to maintain one database or 3 databases
Plz give me brief explanation?
May 3, 2009 at 12:37 pm
The only answer I can come up with is this; It Depends.
What does it depend on? The application and how it is used. Unfortunately you haven't provided any useful information to even give you any kind of guidance at all. Everything in your post is so vague we can't give you any real answers.
May 3, 2009 at 2:14 pm
satishthota (5/3/2009)
I had A HRMS DatabaseIs it necessary to maintain the HRMS_MASTER,HRMS_TRANS,HRMS_HISTORY DATABASES
i.e., one HRMS DATABASE split into 3 databases(HRMS_MASTER,HRMS_TRANS,HRMS_HISTORY)
Give me the reason for why we have to maintain 3 databases
In case of we have not maintained 3 databases(i.e., one HRMS database)
IS THERE ANY Performance dicrease will occur?
Is it correct to maintain one database or 3 databases
Plz give me brief explanation?
Smaller backups, easier restores, easier disk maintenance, easier index maintanence, increased security benefits using synonyms, increased performance on the transactional side of the house, databases optimized for SELECT or INSERT instead of trying for both. There are other things, but that might give you some ideas of what to look for.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply