Consolidating oracle linux system z
This is reasonable if your organization has no DBMS and must purchase one for the first time. Regardless of whether a DBMS exists on-site, a new DBMS is often viewed as a requirement for a new application.
Sometimes a new DBMS product is purchased and installed without first examining if the application could be successfully implemented using an existing DBMS.
The truth is, choosing and installing the DBMS is hardly the most difficult part of a DBA’s job.
The process of choosing a suitable DBMS for enterprise database management is not as difficult as it used to be.
The old DBMS remains and must continue to be supported. No business unit should be allowed to purchase a DBMS without the permission of the DBA group.
This is a difficult provision to implement and even more difficult to enforce.
For example, it is not uncommon for a large company to use IMS or IDMS and DB2 on the mainframe, Oracle and My SQL on several different UNIX servers, Microsoft SQL Server on Windows servers, as well as pockets of other DBMS products such as Sybase, Ingres, Adabas, and Postgre SQL on various platforms, not to mention single-user PC DBMS products such as Microsoft Access, Paradox, and File Maker. Unfortunately, often the answer is that not much thought and planning went into the decision-making process.
There are other reasons for the existence of multiple DBMS platforms in a single organization.
A rack server has a low-profile enclosure, in contrast to a tower server, which is built into an upright, standalone cabinet.
A single rack can contain multiple servers stacked one above the other, consolidating network resources and minimizing the required floor space.
Whenever possible, the policy should minimize the number of different DBMS products.
For a shop with multiple operating systems and multiple types of hardware, choose a default DBMS for the platform.