Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> RE: Standby vs. Adv. Replication (Multi-master)

RE: Standby vs. Adv. Replication (Multi-master)

From: Jack C. Applewhite <japplewhite_at_inetprofit.com>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 09:06:01 -0700
Message-ID: <F001.0030F499.20010525084554@fatcity.com>

Walter,

We have a Standby database and I love it - especially compared to the complexities of replication!

Once you set up the standby database, automate the mechanism for transferring archived redo logs from your production db to the standby, applying them, and deleting them once applied, it requires almost no intervention. About the only time I have to fiddle with the standby is after I add a datafile to a tablespace on the production db.

We're on 8.1.6 under Win2k and our production db has almost 8 million CLOB documents, with about 50,000 added each night. The standby keeps up nicely.

Jack



Jack C. Applewhite
Database Administrator/Developer
OCP Oracle8 DBA
iNetProfit, Inc.
Austin, Texas
www.iNetProfit.com
japplewhite_at_inetprofit.com
(512)327-9068

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2001 11:21 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L

Hi,

I'm looking for feedback on setting up a high-availability architecture for our production database. In a nutshell, we are a 24-hour shop and I need to be able to keep a secondary database
(failover) in sync with the primary in case the
primary fails. I have supported advanced replication
(asynchronous) in the past but it was a single master
relationship not multi-master.

I'm leaning towards a standby database setup because my experience with advanced replication is less than favorable if/when transactions get out of sync. Also, one of the tables contains a LONG RAW. This column may go away or may be converted to a CLOB in the very near future but still needs to be kept in consideration when selecting a solution.

The platform is Sun (SunOS 5.7) with 8.1.6. The secondary machine and database will most likely be located in another state. The database is small right now (~10Gb) and will continue to grow, but not too fast.

What are your opinions?
Is there an obvious choice between the two alternatives?
Is there another alternative that I should be considering?

Thanks VERY much in advance.
-w

-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- 
Author: Jack C. Applewhite
  INET: japplewhite_at_inetprofit.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
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
Received on Fri May 25 2001 - 11:06:01 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US