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

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.misc -> Re: simple 2 machine failover configuration

Re: simple 2 machine failover configuration

From: Pete Sharman <psharman_at_us.oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2000 09:35:08 -0800
Message-ID: <38722F4C.80E55A30@us.oracle.com>


Rainer

This can be managed in a variety of ways depending on your needs.

1, Replicate the database in its entirety using Advanced Replication - may not be possible with throughput needs, you need to worry about conflict resolution etc.

2. Use OPS if you have a clustered configuration - there may be issues here with pinging, though this is lessened with 8.1 and cache fusion (in the read-write scenario anyway).

3. Use cluster failover at the OS level. Script the restart of the database on the second node.

4. Standby database - may not meet the needs, but in 8.1 you can open the standby database in query only mode.

There's not enough information in your post to advise you on the best one, so investigate these a little further.

HTH. Pete

Rainer Mager wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I'm in the early stages of setting up an Oracle database. One
> requirement is that it handles machine failure transparently. To do this 2
> Ultra-SPARC 10 machines have been allocated. What I would like to know is
> what is the best way to do this?
> I believe what is necessary is to have both machines always contain the
> full database with all changes and if one fails the other handles all
> connections. As I mentioned, this must be transparent to the client side.
> If, for example, I have a Java JDBC connection to the db and its server
> fails then the connection closes (of course). I want that client to be able
> to reestablish a connection to the save server (i.e., same IP) and then
> continue on without any other client side reconfiguration.
>
> Any insights would be greatly appreciated.
>
> --Rainer
>
> P.S. Please reply here or remove "nospam-" from my address and reply
> directly.


Received on Tue Jan 04 2000 - 11:35:08 CST

Original text of this message

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