From oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org Wed Jul 7 16:08:57 2004 Return-Path: Received: from air189.startdedicated.com (root@localhost) by orafaq.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i67L8gu22021 for ; Wed, 7 Jul 2004 16:08:52 -0500 X-ClientAddr: 206.53.239.180 Received: from turing.freelists.org (freelists-180.iquest.net [206.53.239.180]) by air189.startdedicated.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i67L8M621960 for ; Wed, 7 Jul 2004 16:08:42 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 0694772C99F; Wed, 7 Jul 2004 15:49:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 08049-94; Wed, 7 Jul 2004 15:49:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 4292D72C88E; Wed, 7 Jul 2004 15:49:43 -0500 (EST) Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list oracle-l); Wed, 07 Jul 2004 15:48:20 -0500 (EST) X-Original-To: oracle-l@freelists.org Delivered-To: oracle-l@freelists.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 1EE6F72C08B for ; Wed, 7 Jul 2004 15:48:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 08049-69 for ; Wed, 7 Jul 2004 15:48:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from hotmail.com (bay12-f4.bay12.hotmail.com [64.4.35.4]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id AC5B972C021 for ; Wed, 7 Jul 2004 15:48:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed, 7 Jul 2004 14:12:09 -0700 Received: from 130.14.71.84 by by12fd.bay12.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 07 Jul 2004 21:12:09 GMT X-Originating-IP: [130.14.71.84] X-Originating-Email: [ichow2@hotmail.com] X-Sender: ichow2@hotmail.com From: "Ivan Chow" To: oracle-l@freelists.org Subject: DataGuard: verify recovery progress Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 17:12:09 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Jul 2004 21:12:09.0502 (UTC) FILETIME=[1088B3E0:01C46467] X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at freelists.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-archive-position: 4597 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org Errors-To: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org X-original-sender: ichow2@hotmail.com Precedence: normal Reply-To: oracle-l@freelists.org X-list: oracle-l X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at freelists.org Hi, I tried to verify if archived logs get applied correctly to my standby database via v$archived_log and v$archive_dest_status but they both returned different results. >From the documentation: v$archive_dest_status.APPLIED_SEQ# NUMBER Identifies the log sequence number of the most recent applied redo log received at the destination v$archived_log.APPLIED VARCHAR2(3) (YES|NO) Indicates whether or not the archivelog has been applied to its corresponding standby database. YES indicates it has been applied; NO indicates it has not. The value is always NO for local destinations SQL> select name,sequence#,archived,applied from v$archived_log; NAME SEQUENCE# ARC APP -------------------------------------------------- ---------- --- --- ... ... ... C:\ORACLE\ADMIN\PSTUR\RARCHDEST\ARC00878.001 878 YES YES C:\ORACLE\ADMIN\PSTUR\RARCHDEST\ARC00879.001 879 YES YES C:\ORACLE\ADMIN\PSTUR\RARCHDEST\ARC00880.001 880 YES YES C:\ORACLE\ADMIN\PSTUR\RARCHDEST\ARC00881.001 881 YES YES SQL> select dest_name,archived_seq#,applied_seq# from v$archive_dest_status; DEST_NAME ARCHIVED_SEQ# APPLIED_SEQ# ------------------------------ ------------- ------------ LOG_ARCHIVE_DEST_1 560 0 LOG_ARCHIVE_DEST_2 0 0 LOG_ARCHIVE_DEST_3 0 0 LOG_ARCHIVE_DEST_4 0 0 LOG_ARCHIVE_DEST_5 0 0 LOG_ARCHIVE_DEST_6 0 0 LOG_ARCHIVE_DEST_7 0 0 LOG_ARCHIVE_DEST_8 0 0 LOG_ARCHIVE_DEST_9 0 0 LOG_ARCHIVE_DEST_10 0 0 LOG_ARCHIVE_DEST_11 881 880 if v$archived_log.applied=YES for sequence#881, I would expect that v$archive_dest_status.applied_seq#=881 too, isn't it? Instead it reports that the max sequence that has been applied is 880. Am I making the right comparision? Which view should I rely on? DB: 9.2.0.4 thanks. Ivan _________________________________________________________________ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfeeŽ Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request@freelists.org put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line. -- Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/ FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html -----------------------------------------------------------------