Originally posted by adrianomp
Yeah, it works. But personally I feel losing control on datafiles when using OMF, it's like a black box. Naming convention doesn't help too. IMHO, OMF does not decrease DBA efforts so much to completely justify its adoption. That's the point.

That's not a problem. OMF can multiplex redo logs and control files with DB_CREATE_ONLINE_LOG_DEST_n.
So you're saying, if your running OMF, you don't know where your Datafiles are? How are you losing control? What, just because you're not naming the datafiles yourself? Really, you stil lmonitor the tablespace via OEM...the name of the file shouldn't make any difference.

I think it's a personal choice, I don't think OMF is a good or bad idea, it can be useful in situations, i.e. SIngle Mount Point, EMC arrays.

I don't think it's related to whether or not its a PROD or TEST db. Why admister your TEST DB differently to your production environment?