| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
 |
 | |||
| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
|
| |||
Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: Rman - Curious Question
Joel Garry wrote:
>
> Holger Baer wrote:
>
>>amerar_at_iwc.net wrote: >> >>>Hi All, >>> >>>Just a curious question: >>> >>>When you are duplicating a database which is on a differnt host, why >>>does it require you to copy the files to the remote host? Why can't >>>RMAN use the files on the primiary host? >>> >>>If you are using a recovery catalog, you use the catalog on the primary >>>host, so, why not also use the backup pieces? All the manual says is >>>that it requires you to copy the file..... >>> >> >>There is (at least) one misconception in your post: The catalog does only hold >>metainformation about the backups, so the fact that it is accessible >>is rather irrelevant for the question why the backup pieces ain't used. >>(In fact, it is recommended that the catalog and the target database are >>on different HW, so the files wouldn't be accessible through the catalog db). >> >>So the backup files are accessible primarily through the target >>- except if they are on tape and both machines can access the tape library >>- except if they are on a filesystem accessible to both machines. >> >>Why does Oracle not use Net 8? Because RMAN creates a server process on the >>target db and no-one in their right minds would like the production server >>to flood his network interface with the 1 TB you mention later in this >>thread.
The point I was trying to make (and obviously missed) is that it's not necessarily the same interface that get's the hit - if Oracle did use Net 8 then it's invariably going to be the DB Server. If the filesystem accessible to both machines is on the DB Server - fair enough, it's most likely the same interface. If the filesystem is on a remote system for both machines, e.g. NetApps, then it's an interface perhaps normally not saturated - in a properly designed environment it won't even content with the phone system you're talking about.
>
> I find the NFS method Sybrand quoted odd, as I think any NFS data
> connection is suspect unless the hardware and software is specifically
> OK'd by Oracle, so a flat "you can do it this way" would be wrong.
Do you want everybody in every post make to include " but make sure that your hardware and software is OK'd by Oracle"? I for my part find that anything else is bound to fail - heck, not even certified combinations of OS and Oracle run necessarily out of the box
>
> I'm sure at least part of the disagreement among the docs has to do
> with the range of NFS implementations. Certainly any that are UDP
> based wouldn't reliably work (guess what the U stands for - OK, it
> stands for User, not Unreliable, although
> http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc768.html says "delivery and duplicate
> protection are not guaranteed" ). And some modern NFS still are UDP
> (for example, hp-ux 11i by default trys TCP first, then falls back to
> UDP on failure). I've even seen rcp have problems with files over,
> say, 20G (on a fast local network).
That's why there was an Oracle Whitepaper specifically describing what features an supported NFS implementation had to have. I'm not sure if it still exists and if it's still uptodate, but it included some certified NFS implementations.
>
>
>>I hope this clears the smoke
I'm gonna turning it off, then ;-)
Holger Received on Fri Jul 29 2005 - 01:30:21 CDT
 |
 |