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: replace logical exp-imp with transportable tablespace

Re: replace logical exp-imp with transportable tablespace

From: Carel-Jan Engel <cjpengel.dbalert_at_xs4all.nl>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 00:30:26 +0200
Message-Id: <1098743426.1245.218.camel@dbalert199.dbalert.nl>


Hi Tomi,
Does this mean that you only need to 'replicate' part of the data of the 2nd database from the 1st?

Depending your datamodel (ehhh, the datamodel of the application you bought) you may consider Logical Standby. There are some restrictions ( read chapter 4, paragraphs 4.1.4/4.1.5 of the Concepts and Administration manual, book A96653-02). It is possible to have just a single schema dataguarded to the other database. In the meantime, the Logical Standby Database can be open for reading and writing.

As you might be aware of, you have to enable supplemental logging.

You still can have your Standby updated once per day: just stop applying the redo to the standby as long as you are running your batches. On the other hand, you should consider how much redo is involved: How long will it take to apply all the redo? When there is changed a lot on the primary data this solution probably isn't particularly usefull. Then you're better of with Casey's idea of automating the Transportable Tablespace transfer.

Do your batches actually change the replicated data? Or is this data just referred to during the batch jobs?
If so, you could consider making the data available (read-only) through a database link. I haven't tried this, but just thinking out loud: Can you have the data available from a read-only Physical Standby Database, through a database link, from the 2nd (actually the 3rd now) database that runs the batches? Then you need three databases: The Primary, the Physical Standby, synchronyzing every night and read-only during the day, and your batch-processing DB, referring to the Physical Standby through a database link.

Food for thought, and I'm curious to hear your final choice!

Best regards,

Carel-Jan Engel

===
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance. (Derek Bok) ===

On Mon, 2004-10-25 at 19:03, tomi wijanto wrote:

> Hi Carel, thanks for your other insight solution.
>
> we are on oracle 9i. Unfortunately, we use the 2nd db
> for batch process (after the exp-imp).
>
> regards,
> tomi
>
> --- Carel-Jan Engel <cjpengel.dbalert_at_xs4all.nl>
> wrote:
>
> > Tomi,
> >
> > What OS/version are you on? Do you need to make
> > changes to the 2nd
> > database? If not, you might consider Data Guard
> > Physical Standby.
> >
> > It allows you to open the 2nd database read-only
> > during the day. At night
> > you put it in managed recovery mode, and it will
> > resync. This can be done
> > through sql-scripts/cron. After sync you put it in
> > R/O mode again.
> >
> > Extra advantage: You have a standby datbase you can
> > use in case of failure
> > of the primary database.
> >
> > Regards, Carel-Jan
> >
> > ===
> > If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.
> > (Derek Bok)
> > ===
> >
> >
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > We have 2 database that need to be in sync every
> > > night, also 1 database for user transactions while
> > > sync process is running.
> > >
> > > Current operation is using logical exp-imp and
> > take
> > > half hour to complete, no manual intervention
> > here.
> > > But because future space estimation is about 20
> > times
> > > more than current, it means at least exp-imp will
> > run
> > > in 10 hours, and this is untolerable.
> > >
> > > So i try to use transportable tablespace instead,
> > but
> > > i'm not sure if this can be done everytimes
> > without
> > > manual intervention (the main reason is because i
> > must
> > > drop existing tablespace in destination, how if it
> > > failed??).
> > >
> > > additional info for current exp-imp process:
> > > - Related tablespace in source db is set to read
> > only
> > > when exp-imp.
> > > - Destination db is idle when exp-imp (no users
> > > connect to it).
> > >
> > > Can transportable tablesplace replace logical
> > exp-imp?
> > > The main limitation is : no manual intervention
> > > allowed (except space problem, of course).
> > >
> > > ps: i believe probably someone will suggest
> > > replication instead of exp-imp. But, i'm sorry,
> > > because i can't change anything related to
> > application
> > > (we use 3rd party vendor).
> > >
> > > regards,
> > > tomi
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> --
> http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Received on Mon Oct 25 2004 - 17:14:47 CDT

Original text of this message

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