Some of us aren't real comfortable with OPS. As I understand it it's more
difficult to manage and suffers severe performance problems unless you're
on 8.1.6. BTW neither of these solutions - clustering or OPS - addresses
the far greater problem of media failure. If you really truly need to be up
24x7 and have a datafile get accidentally deleted, or a disk array that
goes bad, you're SOL. Sure you can recover the datafile(s), but your
application is could be down for the duration of the recovery.
--
Chuck Hamilton
QVC Inc.
Enterprise Technical Services
Oracle DBA
"Steve Orr"
<sorr_at_arzoo.c To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <ORACLE-L_at_fatcity.com>
om> cc: (bcc: CHUCK HAMILTON/QVC)
Ext: NA Subject: Re: Oracle and High Availability solutions
Sent by:
root_at_fatcity.
com
05/08/00
01:37 PM
Please
respond to
ORACLE-L
I'm curious... why use cluster management software without OPS? As I
understand it, with a cluster management only solution, you have to
failover
to another machine by shutting down the first machine, shutting down and
remounting the file system on the failover machine, and starting up Oracle
on the failover machine in crash recovery mode. With OPS you just keep
going
without the need for a failover. Why dedicate a second machine for failover
when you can just use it in parallel? The reason I ask is because our
sysadmin folks are trying to impose Veritas Cluster Manager on DBA team
members who are keen on OPS.
Does anyone have any experience with Veritas Cluster Manager or know of
anyone who has? Any opinions on Veritas?
TIA!!!
Steve Orr
----- Original Message -----
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <ORACLE-L_at_fatcity.com>
Sent: Monday, May 08, 2000 3:44 AM
> Dear All,
>
> Consider High Availability (HA) Oracle systems, i.e UNIX and
> MC/ServiceGuard / TruCluster / HACMP etc
> where the Oracle database and binaries are held on a 'highly resilient'
> shared disk array which can be
> accessed from 2 or more servers.
>
> When either the HA Service providing Oracle is gracefully 'bounced' from
> one
> server to the other, or is restarted on an alternate server due to the
main
> server
> crashing etc, is it true to state that only one server at any one time is
> accessing
> ( or can access ) the Oracle database.
>
> Oracle parallel server is NOT being used !
>
> In all cases, 'simple' scripts are used by the HA Service to stop and
start
> Oracle,
> which normally mimic what an operator would do anyway.
>
> I would have thought that 2 sets of binaries accessing the same database
> would have disatrous consequences.
>
>
> Any thought / experience / comments please .....
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
> Steve Parker
> Technical Consultant
> LIS
>
> --
> Author:
> INET: Steve.Parker_at_lis.co.uk
>
> Fat City Network Services -- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051
> San Diego, California -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
> to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (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).
--
Author: Steve Orr
INET: sorr_at_arzoo.com
Fat City Network Services -- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
--------------------------------------------------------------------
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (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
Received on Wed May 10 2000 - 08:58:55 CDT
