Re: Fault Tolerence, Basic Replication.

Hi Mark

In my opinion, you can justify this cost but knowing these different items : - the overhead with impact on performance with using "advanded replication" - the need to use conflict resolution (even with only 1 active db)

We did this choice for an operational application with 4 db , all replicated between them
but have you think of 'standby solution' instead of 'replication solution' ? And about 'standby database' I'm interested to know the opinion about Oracle people
if it can be a good solution using standby database to build-in a 'fault tolerence' system ?
or if it's just to do like the other concurrent as sybase ??

Regards. Olivier

Mark Powell wrote:

> At the moment I am setting up an Oracle database, I need to build in some
> sort of fault tolerence into the system. This does not need to be
> completely mission critical, but a down time of 30 minutes would be quite
> unexceptable.
>
> I need a solution to use. We have two Oracle boxes, at present ones live
> and ones for a backup/test purposes. Really I require to have the data
> replicated on the fly, but don't require both database to be read/write
> (although this would be nice). Can't really justify the cost of Enterprise
> Edition (Using Workgroup server atm) purely for this ability.
>
> Any suggestion? (Directions towards what section of the
> Backup/Recovery/Replication forest to read!).
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mark.
Received on Sun May 31 1998 - 10:55:06 CDT