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

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: Redo Log Question

Re: Redo Log Question

From: Burt <burtpelt_at_bellsouth.net>
Date: 22 Dec 2002 11:05:13 -0800
Message-ID: <98b09e2b.0212221105.68ab19e8@posting.google.com>


I just thought I would mention a few other points ...

  1. Oracle's 1st recommendation is to use OS mirroring for REDO logs. I could see debating this one and using the 2nd choice.
  2. The 2nd choice is to use Oracle's "mirroring" by specifying a 2nd member in each REDO group.
  3. If you use OS mirroring, you shouldn't need the Oracle mirroring and the opposite is true too.
  4. These REDO logs are the "hottest" (I/O) files in Oracle .
  5. You shouldn't put REDO logs on the same disk as tablespace files.
  6. Oracle writes and reads(if in archivelog mode) these files a lot but sequentially and so the "best" choice is to put them on a OS mirrored file system, not a RAID5 disk (which has a write "penalty").
  7. Specify more than just 1 or 2 groups if in archivelog mode. This allows the LGWR (Log Writer) process time to copy the log before it is reused.
  8. REDO log sizes I have seen used are anywhere from 8Meg to 100Meg. In media recovery, Oracle might take a little longer to apply the most recent REDO log if large. But, a small size might generate too many archived logs .

Chucky <chuck.carson_at_syrrx.com> wrote in message news:<3E05D398.7010208_at_syrrx.com>...
> How would I add more logs per group on a database that has already been
> created and is up and running?
>
> Thx,
> CC
>
> Howard J. Rogers wrote:
> > "Chuckster" <chuckycarson_at_networkcloud.com> wrote in message
> > news:3E04A739.5020503_at_networkcloud.com...
> >
> >>When you have your redo logs created as follows:
> >>LOGFILE
> >> GROUP 1 '/u01/oradata/syrlims/redo01.log' SIZE 10M,
> >> GROUP 2 '/u02/oradata/syrlims/redo02.log' SIZE 10M,
> >> GROUP 3 '/u03/oradata/syrlims/redo03.log' SIZE 10M,
> >> GROUP 4 '/u04/oradata/syrlims/redo04.log' SIZE 10M
> >
> >
> > Correct. No redundancy. If you wanted redundancy, it would look like this:
> >
> > LOGFILE
> > GROUP 1
> > ('/u01/oradata/syrlims/redo1a.log','/u05/blahblahblah/redo1b.log') SIZE
> > 10M,
> > GROUP 2 ('/u02/oradata/syrlims/redo2a.log','/u06/bbb/redo2b.log') SIZE
> > 10M,
> > GROUP 3 ('/u03/oradata/syrlims/redo3a.log','/u07/bbb/redo3b.log') SIZE
> > 10M,
> > GROUP 4 ('/u04/oradata/syrlims/redo4a.log','/u08/bbb/redo4b.log') SIZE
> > 10M
> >
> > Extra groups buy you time before you start over-writing earlier logs (and,
> > specifically, buys ARCH time to archive the earlier logs before your try and
> > re-use them).
> >
> > Extra members per group buys you resilience and redundancy.
> >
> > And I've renamed your original files so that the number indicates the group
> > and the letter indicates the member, which I find easier to manage than the
> > 'official' recommendation of, for example, REDO0101 and REDO0102.
> >
> > Regards
> > HJR
> >
> >
> >>
> >>This is merely 4 different log files with no redundancy correct? If I
> >>wanted path redundancy, I would need to add more log files per group and
> >> make sure they are on different volume groups/spindles correct?
> >>
> >>Thanks,
> >>CC
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>-----------== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Uncensored Usenet News
> >
> > ==----------
> >
> >> http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> >>-----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Unlimited Fast Downloads - 19 Servers
> >
> > =-----
> >
> >
>
>
>
> -----------== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
> http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> -----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Unlimited Fast Downloads - 19 Servers =-----
Received on Sun Dec 22 2002 - 13:05:13 CST

Original text of this message

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