Re: Shareplex

From: Vishal Gupta <vishal_at_vishalgupta.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2011 07:53:30 +0100
Message-Id: <C40C6D4E-EBA9-4E81-BC3D-B1EC607F587B_at_vishalgupta.com>

Shareplex being expensive doea not make GoldenGate cheaper?

Cheers,
Vishal

On 2 Aug 2011, at 05:51, "kyle Hailey" <kylelf_at_gmail.com> wrote:

> Shareplex is cheeper than Goldengate?!
>
> Everyone in this thread has been saying how expensive Shareplex is.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 9:39 PM, Connor McDonald <mcdonald.connor_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Why would someone choose Shareplex over Goldengate?
>
> $20K per cpu might be a reason :-)
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 5:58 AM, kyle Hailey <kylelf_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Goldengate vs Shareplex
> Why would someone choose Shareplex over Goldengate?
>
> just curious, not really in the market.
>
> - Kyle
> http://dboptimizer.com
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Vishal Gupta <vishal_at_vishalgupta.com> wrote:
> I have used Shareplex in past back in 9i and 10g days when Oracle AQ could scale up to replicate 10-15million transaction/day and still keep data latency low. Shareplex was great for Oracle to Oracle replication. I dont know about the price though.
>
> If you are looking for something cross RDBMS, then you could also go for GoldenGate.
>
>
> On 27 Jul 2011, at 17:07, Amaral, Rui wrote:
>
> > We had it at my previous employer a few years ago as well. It worked but expensive and a bit of a memory hog in our environment.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org [mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org] On Behalf Of Bill Ferguson
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2011 12:05 PM
> > To: RStorey_at_dcso.nashville.org
> > Cc: oracle-l-freelists
> > Subject: Re: Shareplex
> >
> > Tried it several years ago and finally dropped it. It was SUPER
> > expensive, and we (myself and the Quest folks) could never get it to
> > work correctly with Oracle 10g and Windows 2003 Server. Everything
> > they tried still failed, so after spending $65K on it and over a year
> > of effort, we dropped it.
> >
> > You are also prety much correct in what it does, though the setup for
> > it was far less than dataguard.
> >
> > --
> > -- Bill Ferguson
> > --
> > http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
> >
> >
> >
> > NOTICE: Confidential message which may be privileged. Unauthorized use/disclosure prohibited. If received in error, please go to www.td.com/legal for instructions.
> > AVIS : Message confidentiel dont le contenu peut être privilégié. Utilisation/divulgation interdites sans permission. Si reçu par erreur, prière d'aller au www.td.com/francais/avis_juridique pour des instructions.
> > --
> > http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
> >
> >
>
> --
> http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Connor McDonald
> ===========================
> email: connor_mcdonald_at_yahoo.com
> web: http://www.oracledba.co.uk
>
> "Semper in excremento, sole profundum qui variat"
>

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

Received on Tue Aug 02 2011 - 01:53:30 CDT