Re: Standby on Same box
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 11:08:21 -0800 (PST)
Ok I have done it both ways.
If you can have two standbys then you can do BOTH. Have one for immediate recovery and one delayed by a day or so but provide enough space for the archive logs.
I had a server with space for two standbys.
I used to check for block corruption on the archive logs on the delayed on before applying it to my delayed standby server.
This assumes you have a large box or two boxes, etc.
If your business can afford to be down for a small amount of time, a small delay can be done as well. It normally takes a bit to fail over anyway with the application. Applying a few archive logs is pretty fast (again depending on your box). But like Jared says you have to be Johnny on the stop.
I had to do this a bit for 9i with flashback on 10G you have more wiggle room.
- On Tue, 2/3/09, Jared Still <jkstill_at_gmail.com> wrote:
From: Jared Still <jkstill_at_gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Standby on Same box
Cc: katpopins21_at_yahoo.com, oracle-l_at_freelists.org Date: Tuesday, February 3, 2009, 11:19 AM
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 6:33 AM, Newman, Christopher <cjnewman_at_uillinois.edu> wrote:
By the way; one poster noted that by implementing a delay, one could avoid data corruption. Has anyone actually used this to good effect? My impression of this option is that you have to be "Johnny on the Spot" to stop the apply in time, and it lengthens your recovery time. Real time apply is the way to go at any rate.
Carel-Jan Engel has used this to great effect.
I seem to recall he saved a client a great deal of time, effort and of course money by having a delay.
He used to participate on this list, and is *the* DG expert IMO.
Certifiable Oracle DBA and Part Time Perl Evangelist