Re: Applying a cpu patch in Oracle 10.2.0.4 RAC environment c/w dataguard standby database

From: Steve Howard <stevedhoward_at_gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 09:53:34 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <db3662ad-70f0-4fd2-966b-5e25542e5daf_at_by6g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>



On Feb 21, 10:16 am, dba cjb <chris.br..._at_providentinsurance.co.uk> wrote:
> I am applying a patch ( 38 ) on production at the week-end on 3 node
> cluster on oracle 10.2.0.4 / this will also be applied to dataguard
> standby database on seperate 3 node cluster.
>
> os is windows 2003 sp 2
>
> I have practised patch apply on  copy production many times and have
> confidence this will work.
>
> The general order of events will be:-
>
> 1) Stop production
> 2) Stop Standy
> 3) apply binaries  part of patch on production
> 4) apply binarries part of  patch on Standby
> 5) Start standby
> 6) Start production
>
> 7) Apply database scripts to production
>
> I will be unable to test until the week-end
>
> My main concern is that standby can apply archivelogs that were
> generated from redo before patch / database upgrade  as well as logs
> resulting from upgrade and after
>
> / especially in rac environment wher application of standby logs
> generated from independant nodes is not independant
>
> If anyone can allay my fears or point to hints/documentation I would
> be gratefull
>
> cheers
> Chris B

Hi Chris,

We have done this several times without any issues. When we were particularly nervous, after patching the primary software and database, we would allow the the standby to accumulate the transaction logs. We didn't apply them until we had patched the database software on the standby database. We would then apply the logs, through which the new patched structures would be applied by the correct version of the database software on the standby.

However, as noted, we never had any issues when we just let them be applied even with the "wrong" version (i.e., the standby database software that didn't have the CPU patch applied).

HTH, Steve Received on Mon Feb 21 2011 - 11:53:34 CST

Original text of this message