Re: Active data guard vs streams/shareplex
From: <johnbhurley_at_sbcglobal.net>
Date: Sun, 5 Apr 2009 10:32:06 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <35408eea-7e48-49d6-a484-f41ccb651959_at_w40g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
On Apr 5, 10:13 am, dk <kigh..._at_bellsouth.net> wrote:
> We currently use sharplex to replicate from a source to a target.
> However with the 11g active dataguard we considering replacing
> shareplex. The question is can the new dataguard serve as a replacement
> for streams/shareplex. The source and target need to be in-sync pretty
> much real time.
>
> Thanks
Date: Sun, 5 Apr 2009 10:32:06 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <35408eea-7e48-49d6-a484-f41ccb651959_at_w40g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
On Apr 5, 10:13 am, dk <kigh..._at_bellsouth.net> wrote:
> We currently use sharplex to replicate from a source to a target.
> However with the 11g active dataguard we considering replacing
> shareplex. The question is can the new dataguard serve as a replacement
> for streams/shareplex. The source and target need to be in-sync pretty
> much real time.
>
> Thanks
You can configure dataguard so that all writes to the online redo logs "have to be" successfully transmitted ( replicated ) before the system continues. It has some heavy bandwidth requirements ( depending on workload ) and performance implications especially depending on distance between sites when configured like that.
If you operate like that ... if you experience network troubles between sites ... could get ugly.
There are lots of different ways to configure Dataguard. Have you looked at the Oracle Dataguard doc?
We use EMC async replication ( a hardware based approach ) ... instead of database centric approaches. Received on Sun Apr 05 2009 - 12:32:06 CDT