Return-Path: <root@fatcity.cts.com>
Received: from newsfeed.cts.com (newsfeed.cts.com [209.68.248.164])
 by naude.co.za (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id g5KNe7M30653
 for <oracle-l@naude.co.za>; Thu, 20 Jun 2002 19:40:07 -0400
Received: from fatcity.UUCP (uucp@localhost)
 by newsfeed.cts.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with UUCP id IAA92226;
 Thu, 20 Jun 2002 08:39:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by fatcity.com (26-Feb-2001/v1.0g-b71/bab) via UUCP id 00482C4E; Thu, 20 Jun 2002 07:48:32 -0800
Message-ID: <F001.00482C4E.20020620074832@fatcity.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 07:48:32 -0800
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <ORACLE-L@fatcity.com>
X-Comment: Oracle RDBMS Community Forum
X-Sender: Brian McGraw <brian.mcgraw@infinity-insurance.com>
Sender: root@fatcity.com
Reply-To: ORACLE-L@fatcity.com
Errors-To: ML-ERRORS@fatcity.com
From: Brian McGraw <brian.mcgraw@infinity-insurance.com>
Subject: RE: Replication question
Organization: Fat City Network Services, San Diego, California
X-ListServer: v1.0g, build 71; ListGuru (c) 1996-2001 Bruce A. Bergman
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

Just a note, Johanna.  We put all of our Oracle Replication metadata
into separate tablespaces, and had absolutely no problems.

Brian

----------------------------------------------
| Brian McGraw /* DBA */  Infinity Insurance |
| mailto:Brian.McGraw@Infinity-Insurance.com |
----------------------------------------------

-----Original Message-----
johanna.doran@sungard.com
Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2002 10:24 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L

Dennis,

	All dbs whether SQL Server or Oracle need to deal with conflict
resolution, thats not strictly an Oracle limitation.  As far a Quest
goes, they handle replication completely different from Oracle.  Oracle
itself is still using triggers (in 8i at least) , ubt now they hide the
trigger, Shareplex reads the Oracle redo logs.  I believe that 9i uses
the redo logs and is based (structured) after Shareplex itself - there
were lots of articles on this with the pre-release of Dataguard.
Furthermore, Oracle places all of its replication metadata in SYSTEM
tablespace which I dont like, Sharpelex uses its own (which the user
configures).  As far as Shareplex manuals, Quest is the one company that
I will stand up and say that regardless of anything else, their
documention is EXCELLENT.  Their documentation takes you from Shareplex
architecture right to directory structure, actual files, usage and even
scripting.  The sales rep was incorrect.  However, I can see them not
releasing the manuals without a purchase.

	I believe that they are available on-line for download, though I
do not know if it is just for current customers only.  
(hehe can't believe I am defending a vendor:>).  But when someone does
something right, I like to give credit.  Also, once you are setup, they
are VERY stable.  I have my issues with them, but overall I feel they do
great job at what they do.


Hannah - Hope it helps any.


>  -----Original Message-----
> From: 	root@fatcity.com@SUNGARD   On Behalf Of DENNIS WILLIAMS
<DWILLIAMS@LIFETOUCH.COM>
> Sent:	Thursday, June 20, 2002 10:33 AM
> To:	Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
> Subject:	RE: Replication question
> 
> Yechel - Wow, what a blow to be struck with the dreaded RTFM first
thing in
> the morning. Thanks Yechiel, I needed that.
> 	Actually, I was hoping there was another resource besides the
> manual, for two reasons:
> 	1. This development group is a little irritated that they are
forced
> to use Oracle instead of MS SQL, so they are taking replication issues
as
> being Oracle limitations.
> 	2. They have been talking to the Quest salespeople, who
naturally
> heap disdain on Oracle's standard replication (selected Oracle SE
because
> the price was closer to MS SQL). I asked the Quest rep if they had a
> document similar to the Oracle manual. Gosh, he couldn't think of one.
Since
> nobody on the list has mentioned one, maybe they don't have one. The
best
> resource I've found so far is a former Sybase DBA who was able to
confirm
> that log-based replication has most of the same issues as Oracle
standard
> replication has.
> 	Thanks everyone for your replies.
> 
> Dennis Williams
> DBA, 20% OCP
> Lifetouch, Inc.
> dwilliams@lifetouch.com
> 
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- 
Author: 
  INET: johanna.doran@sungard.com

Fat City Network Services    -- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California        -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
--------------------------------------------------------------------
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: ListGuru@fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).


-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- 
Author: Brian McGraw
  INET: brian.mcgraw@infinity-insurance.com

Fat City Network Services    -- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California        -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
--------------------------------------------------------------------
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: ListGuru@fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).

