Re: Upgrade 9.2 to 11.2 with minimal downtime
From: Chuck <chuckh1958_nospam_at_gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2011 10:42:39 -0400
Message-ID: <is87gv$386$3_at_dont-email.me>
On 6/1/2011 8:40 PM, joel garry wrote:
>
> Like the others said, that sounds too slow. Have you tried exporting
> into a pipe and compressing, then going over the network? Also,
> creating tables as select can sometimes do surprisingly good, but it
> also is very sensitive to pipe size.
>
> It could very well be lobs too, you might consider doing those
> separately from everything else. I take it they are not inline?
Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2011 10:42:39 -0400
Message-ID: <is87gv$386$3_at_dont-email.me>
On 6/1/2011 8:40 PM, joel garry wrote:
>
> Like the others said, that sounds too slow. Have you tried exporting
> into a pipe and compressing, then going over the network? Also,
> creating tables as select can sometimes do surprisingly good, but it
> also is very sensitive to pipe size.
>
> It could very well be lobs too, you might consider doing those
> separately from everything else. I take it they are not inline?
The import was running with commit=y. I removed that and the import went from 36 hours to 7.5 hours which may be within my client's tolerance for down time. I'm thinking maybe to set indexes=n as well and build the indexes afterwards in parallel. Received on Thu Jun 02 2011 - 09:42:39 CDT