Re: Oracle 10 Failover
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 19:34:25 -0700
> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 20:44:47 +0200, "Chris Seidel" <cseidel_at_arcor.de>
>> sybrandb_at_hccnet.nl wrote: >> >>> I wouldn't consider client side failover using any form of >>> replication. >> Why not if the data doesn't have to be "brand new"?
> I already explained Streams and CDC are asynchronous. This means
> transaction consistency is NOT guaranteed. Dataguard potentially
> guarantees transaction consistency.
>>> Client side failover applies to Dataguard or RAC, not Streams or CDC. >> RAC uses a single database. So RAC alone is not an option for a distributed >> environment. In a distr. env. I need RAC + Data Guard, right? >>
> Are we discussing a distributed environment? As far as I am concerned
> we are discussing misusing distributed multi-directional technologies
> (replication, streams) to mimic unidirectional fallback technologies
> The main purpose of RAC is to protect servers (and to offer additional
> The main purpose of Dataguard is to protect disks.
> I do not see where distributed environment comes into play, nowhere
> you described you have a distributed environment.
A few small corrections. Streams can be set up synchronously or asychronously. Data Guard does guarantee zero data loss when configured synchronously ... maximum protection mode.
Chris: Define what you mean by "distributed environment." The term is subject to different interpretations by different people.
-- Daniel A. Morgan Oracle Ace Director & Instructor University of Washington damorgan_at_x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond) Puget Sound Oracle Users Group www.psoug.orgReceived on Wed Sep 10 2008 - 21:34:25 CDT