Re: Active data guard vs streams/shareplex
From: Palooka <nobody_at_nowhere.com>
Date: Sun, 05 Apr 2009 21:38:34 +0100
Message-ID: <fF8Cl.297193$WX2.91521_at_newsfe23.ams2>
dk wrote:
> We currently use sharplex to replicate from a source to a target.
> However with the 11g active dataguard we considering replacing
> shareplex. The question is can the new dataguard serve as a replacement
> for streams/shareplex. The source and target need to be in-sync pretty
> much real time.
>
> Thanks
Date: Sun, 05 Apr 2009 21:38:34 +0100
Message-ID: <fF8Cl.297193$WX2.91521_at_newsfe23.ams2>
dk 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
What does "pretty much real time" mean? Real time or not? If not, how much data loss can you tolerate? If it must be synchronous, how far away is your standby site? What network bandwidth is available? What response times are required by your SLA?
There are no short answers, but these are the kind of questions to consider.
Palooka Received on Sun Apr 05 2009 - 15:38:34 CDT