Re: what is your opinion about oracle replication?

In article <3CBAD5D1.3010707_at_noos.fr>, Hieraklion says...
>
>"Bonjour" from Paris (France).
>
>It depends the need to have. Replication is usefull in order to maintain
>data in several sites and u need to access to these datas geographically
>in differents places. The choice between synchronous or asynchronous,
>number of masters ... depends of u need.
>
>However, if you need to maintain a high avaibility architecture : use
>stand-by database or OPS ( i don't remember the term in 9i database).
>Replication is not the method to garantee a HA Oracle architecture.

THe terms you're missing are Dataguard and RAC (Real Application CLusters) but what I really wanted to comment on is that these are used for two different HA scenarios. Dataguard (or Standby in pre-9i versions) is often used for site failover (replication can also be used for this), RAC is for machine failover. TO have a true HA configuration, you need to cater for both.

>
>"Au revoir" from Paris
>Hieraklion
>
>
>chao_ping wrote:
>
>>Hi, We are considering whether we should use replication in oracle
>>system, to satisfy our enviroment. Not sure whether using dblink is
>>better or refer to oracle replication. So, dear dbas, what about your
>>experience about replication? Is it a good product? Is it stable? I need
>>suggestion from your all.:) Thanks.
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>an oracle fan,
>>an oracle beginner
>>
>>Posted via dBforums
>>http://dbforums.com
>>
>

HTH. Additions and corrections welcome.

Pete

SELECT standard_disclaimer, witty_remark FROM company_requirements; Received on Mon Apr 15 2002 - 10:55:25 CDT