I am trying to find an document which clearly states it is a nonsence
Ok, i am only listing points against it.
Against MCOD:
- having different SAP products in one database can be a problem when for example the BW needs a different setting than the PI
- SAP schemas are huge regarding data size, number of tables, so MCOD never was a big success. You are also complicating maintenance on the database, if one of the systems is 7x24, then you cannot do a database upgrade on another that has only 5x8 uptime requirements.
- if an error happens one SAP system, and you have to do a restore with point in time recovery ALL systems in that database have to be reset!
Against distributed installation (database <-> sap application server):
- in a distributed installation, the availability decreases, either the application server OR the database server OR the network in between can fail-> more unplanned downtime.
- the performance of a distributed installation cannot be faster compared to a single system installation, because of the additional network time
Against both:
- Simple system landscapes work best. If ever possible stick to standard/basic installations, they are known to work. Complicating your landscape can increase costs, increase needed knowledge to admin staff, cause more errors / services disruptions.
I don't think there will be one single document stating this is nonsense. Try to get the reasons, why you are asked to do it. Then we can see how valid they are.
Cheers Michael
Edited by: mho on Dec 17, 2010 12:41 PM
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.