Re: Dataguard Exadata -> Database Appliance
From: Fuad Arshad <fuadar_at_yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 11:13:43 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <1397585623.63829.YahooMailNeo_at_web181004.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
Martin, Absolutely agree on all points. moving to a non Exadata platform from an Exadata platform while possible you lose a lot of the exadata specific optimizations. If the goal is to just build cheaper dev platforms that might be ok but for true DR it would complicate things and performance. From: Martin Bach <development_at_the-playground.de> To: ivanrs79_at_gmail.com; Ivan Ricardo Schuster <ivanrs79_at_gmail.com>; Chris.Stephens_at_adm.com Cc: Hemant K Chitale <hemantkchitale_at_gmail.com>; "oracle-l_at_freelists.org" <oracle-l_at_freelists.org> Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2014 12:40 PM Subject: Re: Dataguard Exadata -> Database Appliance Hello all, This is an interesting thread! I think an important point is missing here though. Exadata, especially since 11.2.3.3.0, will make very elegant choices when it comes to caching data in the Smart Flash Cache. You will see very decent response times. You will also notice that smart scans will benefit from intelligent caching. This works so well that I had to rewrite some of my demos. Those features do not exist outside the Exadata platform. Outside of Exadata you get no smart IO either, so when you are in the uncomfortable position where you actually have to invoke DR you could well be in trouble because your DR site does not perform adequately. And there is more hidden trouble like for example IORM you can't have outside of Exadata... Not using identical hardware for DR is a risk in my opinion. The OPs question is similar in concept to reusing your old production kit for DR. It too might work while in the standby role, but will cost likely not support the production workload (it is the old kit for a reason). Hope this helps, Martin -- Martin Bach Enkitec martincarstenbach.wordpress.com
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 11:13:43 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <1397585623.63829.YahooMailNeo_at_web181004.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
Martin, Absolutely agree on all points. moving to a non Exadata platform from an Exadata platform while possible you lose a lot of the exadata specific optimizations. If the goal is to just build cheaper dev platforms that might be ok but for true DR it would complicate things and performance. From: Martin Bach <development_at_the-playground.de> To: ivanrs79_at_gmail.com; Ivan Ricardo Schuster <ivanrs79_at_gmail.com>; Chris.Stephens_at_adm.com Cc: Hemant K Chitale <hemantkchitale_at_gmail.com>; "oracle-l_at_freelists.org" <oracle-l_at_freelists.org> Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2014 12:40 PM Subject: Re: Dataguard Exadata -> Database Appliance Hello all, This is an interesting thread! I think an important point is missing here though. Exadata, especially since 11.2.3.3.0, will make very elegant choices when it comes to caching data in the Smart Flash Cache. You will see very decent response times. You will also notice that smart scans will benefit from intelligent caching. This works so well that I had to rewrite some of my demos. Those features do not exist outside the Exadata platform. Outside of Exadata you get no smart IO either, so when you are in the uncomfortable position where you actually have to invoke DR you could well be in trouble because your DR site does not perform adequately. And there is more hidden trouble like for example IORM you can't have outside of Exadata... Not using identical hardware for DR is a risk in my opinion. The OPs question is similar in concept to reusing your old production kit for DR. It too might work while in the standby role, but will cost likely not support the production workload (it is the old kit for a reason). Hope this helps, Martin -- Martin Bach Enkitec martincarstenbach.wordpress.com
-- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-lReceived on Tue Apr 15 2014 - 20:13:43 CEST