Return-Path: X-Original-To: oracle-l@orafaq.com Delivered-To: oracle-l@orafaq.com Received: from puck1183.startdedicated.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by puck1183.startdedicated.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EB6219611FF for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 17:14:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from turing.freelists.org (turing.freelists.org [206.53.239.180]) by puck1183.startdedicated.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 17:14:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 1A16254F5; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 11:14:33 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=freelists.org; s=turing; t=1499440473; bh=WQr+EvVfbAP7L+1pA0p/FURBffG+q27SHi7f0fGp4iI=; h=From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Reply-To:List-help: List-unsubscribe:List-Id:List-subscribe:List-owner:List-post: List-archive; b=CIaKm3oxYV82DCKrnZZn1+joh/JN06zDlqze7W6SfDggeDfPnTqrlAkRjhLg4T2gm AWXr1fZ6IhfMB5YN8N1vn6K41PmU9v53E4SeQQdLTToaT/m53QINXSlYhSNSSt9MdV fiOyqFzEQkDUpIuvGlTo+rqlNSgmreOxdYp3mQaA= X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at turing.freelists.org Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing.freelists.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3r_pYiqaSXhT; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 11:14:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from turing.freelists.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id D90279864; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 11:14:20 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=freelists.org; s=turing; t=1499440472; bh=WQr+EvVfbAP7L+1pA0p/FURBffG+q27SHi7f0fGp4iI=; h=From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Reply-To:List-help: List-unsubscribe:List-Id:List-subscribe:List-owner:List-post: List-archive; b=jXWs6w2QKm66yCfAWzLH8Rtale9qbZlvBdzE5KEetQ82zni1W0s2C0DyPHQqrIFiS vM/nghiYTbqtQ24hbl63eRJo7noS8IXFbZ1mH816JAjtADs4Kb4kyV/cxiWC2tfk/s KwuwlUArl/bEf2TGZ/P6bT/2P2ye+GZR9HSw4Jrw= Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list oracle-l); Fri, 07 Jul 2017 11:12:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 2C955982F for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 11:12:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing.freelists.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iyUOVzJznZ3O for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 11:12:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cpanel.firstlight.net (cpanel.firstlight.net [72.0.157.4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTPS id CFFA52080E for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 11:12:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from c-73-207-107-139.hsd1.ga.comcast.net ([73.207.107.139]:49513 helo=mwf4500) by cpanel.firstlight.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1dTUwE-0005fN-15; Fri, 07 Jul 2017 11:12:58 -0400 From: "Mark W. Farnham" To: "'Martin Klier - Performing Databases GmbH'" Cc: "'Ethan Post'" , "'Martin Berger'" , "'Oracle-L oracle-l'" References: <1102566890.2106.1498735475833.JavaMail.zimbra@performing-db.com> <9318cbf1-cc52-6d99-9bc7-4d9cc3c9fe8f@gmail.com> <1466277677.1482.1498821721635.JavaMail.zimbra@performing-db.com> <1255527857.1020.1499079159515.JavaMail.zimbra@performing-db.com> <00e101d2f407$cb34a8a0$619df9e0$@gmail.com> <2084840861.1566.1499160251285.JavaMail.zimbra@performing-db.com> <027801d2f651$bb36cb80$31a46280$@rsiz.com> <1818529611.671.1499411154340.JavaMail.zimbra@performing-db.com> In-Reply-To: <1818529611.671.1499411154340.JavaMail.zimbra@performing-db.com> Subject: RE: RAC One Node - Instances not open at the same time! Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2017 11:12:33 -0400 Message-ID: <03e101d2f733$762c4050$6284c0f0$@rsiz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_03E2_01D2F711.EF1F8250" Content-Language: en-us X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - cpanel.firstlight.net X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - freelists.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - rsiz.com X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: cpanel.firstlight.net: authenticated_id: mfarnham@rsiz.com X-Authenticated-Sender: cpanel.firstlight.net: mfarnham@rsiz.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-archive-position: 68727 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org Errors-to: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org X-original-sender: mwf@rsiz.com Precedence: normal Reply-To: mwf@rsiz.com List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-Id: oracle-l X-List-ID: oracle-l List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: List-archive: X-list: oracle-l ------=_NextPart_000_03E2_01D2F711.EF1F8250 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I think my idea for services alone would not handle that, because I = believe dbms_job internally spawns a sid,serial#, rather than routing = through a listener. But you could use the instance parameter for those = jobs (using a value different from 0). =20 IF you looked up your active instance (in a table, for example, that you = changed if you switched the instance you wanted to use), read that value = and apply that via dbms_job.instance, that coupled with the preferred = service should work. =20 The question is whether or not it is easy or difficult with your = application to inject that dbms_job.instance assignment. Presumably you = want to use =E2=80=98FORCE=E2=80=99 so it errors if the desired instance = is not available. =20 Service orientation is available in DBMS_SCHEDULER. I *suppose* you = could submit your dbms_job activations via DBMS_SCHEDULER which would = look up the preferred node for the service and then then as part of = submitting the DBMS_JOB it would first look at the current instance and = add that parameter to the DBMS_JOB call. =20 Maybe ensuring that only one instance is up is easier after all. I = *think* my jury rig above could be made to work, but I=E2=80=99m not = sure it is worth the trouble. =20 mwf =20 From: Martin Klier - Performing Databases GmbH = [mailto:martin.klier@performing-db.com]=20 Sent: Friday, July 07, 2017 3:06 AM To: Mark Farnham Cc: Ethan Post; Martin Berger; Oracle-L oracle-l Subject: Re: RAC One Node - Instances not open at the same time! =20 Hi Mark, =20 thanks for your reply. Will all the service-centered approaches work for = dbms_jobs? =20 Thanks Martin =20 --=20 Martin Klier | Performing Databases GmbH Managing Partner | Senior DB Consultant Oracle ACE martin.klier@performing-db.com | https://www.performing-databases.com =20 _____ =20 Von: "Mark Farnham" An: "martin klier" , "Ethan Post" = CC: "Martin Berger" , "Oracle-L oracle-l" = Gesendet: Donnerstag, 6. Juli 2017 14:16:42 Betreff: RE: RAC One Node - Instances not open at the same time! Did I miss a memo and service connection node preference is not = available on =E2=80=9COne Node?=E2=80=9D =20 My initial reaction is that having one or the other node as preferred = and then restarting the service the opposite if a node is intentionally = down would be a reasonable solution that, for example, allows = non-application work to reside in the instance shared pool and possibly = buffer cache of the non-preferred instance. =20 Your mileage may vary. =20 mwf =20 From: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org = [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of Martin Klier - = Performing Databases GmbH Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2017 5:24 AM To: Ethan Post Cc: Martin Berger; Oracle-L oracle-l Subject: Re: RAC One Node - Instances not open at the same time! =20 Ethan, =20 thank you very much. --=20 Martin Klier | Performing Databases GmbH Managing Partner | Senior DB Consultant Oracle ACE martin.klier@performing-db.com | https://www.performing-databases.com =20 _____ =20 Von: "Ethan Post" An: "martin klier" , "Martin Berger" = CC: "Oracle-L oracle-l" Gesendet: Montag, 3. Juli 2017 16:22:22 Betreff: RE: RAC One Node - Instances not open at the same time! 2 cents=20 =20 My recommendation would be to set up an alert that opens ticket, sends = email/message etc=E2=80=A6when two instances are running with an = explanation of the reasons both should not be open unless the potential = for problems is truly high risk issue. =20 The =E2=80=9Ctrigger=E2=80=9D solution is good but if you are in a high = turnover environment, moving to cloud someday, cloning, replicating = system, doing upgrades etc=E2=80=A6there is a chance this will come back = to bite someone someday. It isn=E2=80=99t obvious enough, whereas the = alert would be very obvious. =20 So if you have big data/job corruption issue then it needs to be = enforced strictly, otherwise go with an notify solution. =20 Thanks =20 From: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org = [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of Martin Klier - = Performing Databases GmbH Sent: Monday, July 3, 2017 5:53 AM To: Martin Berger Cc: Oracle-L oracle-l Subject: Re: RAC One Node - Instances not open at the same time! =20 Martin, =20 sounds very cool. Thanks! =20 --=20 Martin Klier | Performing Databases GmbH Managing Partner | Senior DB Consultant Oracle ACE martin.klier@performing-db.com | https://www.performing-databases.com =20 _____ =20 Von: "Martin Berger" An: "Martin Klier" CC: "Oracle-L oracle-l" Gesendet: Freitag, 30. Juni 2017 14:32:00 Betreff: Re: RAC One Node - Instances not open at the same time! Hi Martin,=20 as this is an open discussion what's about this concept:=20 =20 you write a startup trigger which immediately set=20 alter system enable restricted session; then it spools gv$instance until it's sure the other instance is gone, at the end do=20 alter system disable restricted session; =20 that's maybe not a very elegant method, but it might solve your request? = =20 (everything is untested right now on my side) =20 Martin =20 2017-06-30 13:22 GMT+02:00 Martin Klier - Performing Databases GmbH = : Why? It's an open concept discussion, no system was configured yet. --=20 Martin Klier | Performing Databases GmbH Managing Partner | Senior DB Consultant Oracle ACE martin.klier@performing-db.com | https://www.performing-databases.com =20 _____ =20 Von: "Mladen Gogala" An: oracle-l@freelists.org Gesendet: Freitag, 30. Juni 2017 00:21:30 Betreff: Re: RAC One Node - Instances not open at the same time! On 06/29/2017 07:24 AM, Martin Klier - Performing Databases GmbH wrote: Hi Listers, =20 when running Oracle RAC One Node, is there a way to avoid both instances = being open at the same time? =20 Background: I have an application that's by no way ready for RAC (using dbms_jobs = and much more). But they want to use the benefits of One Node for = operating the cluster. All that's needed is a failover cluster. =20 Please post the output of srvctl config db -d . --=20 Mladen Gogala Oracle DBA Tel: (347) 321-1217 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 ------=_NextPart_000_03E2_01D2F711.EF1F8250 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I think my idea for services = alone would not handle that, because I believe dbms_job internally = spawns a sid,serial#, rather than routing through a listener. But you = could use the instance parameter for those jobs (using a value different = from 0).

 

IF you = looked up your active instance (in a table, for example, that you = changed if you switched the instance you wanted to use), read that value = and apply that via dbms_job.instance, that coupled with the preferred = service should work.

 

The = question is whether or not it is easy or difficult with your application = to inject that dbms_job.instance assignment. Presumably you want to use = =E2=80=98FORCE=E2=80=99 so it errors if the desired instance is not = available.

 

Service = orientation is available in DBMS_SCHEDULER. I *suppose* you could = submit your dbms_job activations via DBMS_SCHEDULER which would look up = the preferred node for the service and then then as part of submitting = the DBMS_JOB it would first look at the current instance and add that = parameter to the DBMS_JOB call.

 

Maybe = ensuring that only one instance is up is easier after all. I = *think* my jury rig above could be made to work, but I=E2=80=99m = not sure it is worth the trouble.

 

mwf

 

From:= = Martin Klier - Performing Databases GmbH = [mailto:martin.klier@performing-db.com]
Sent: Friday, July = 07, 2017 3:06 AM
To: Mark Farnham
Cc: Ethan Post; = Martin Berger; Oracle-L oracle-l
Subject: Re: RAC One Node - = Instances not open at the same time!

 

= Hi Mark,

=  

= thanks for your reply. Will all the service-centered approaches = work for dbms_jobs?

=  

= Thanks

= Martin

=  

= --
Martin Klier | Performing Databases GmbH
Managing Partner | = Senior DB Consultant
Oracle ACE

martin.klier@performing-db= .com | https://www.performing-data= bases.com

=  

=

Von: = "Mark = Farnham" <mwf@rsiz.com>
An: = "martin klier" <martin.klier@performing-db= .com>, "Ethan Post" <post.ethan@gmail.com>
C= C: "Martin Berger" <martin.a.berger@gmail.com&g= t;, "Oracle-L oracle-l" <oracle-l@freelists.org>
= Gesendet: Donnerstag, 6. Juli 2017 14:16:42
Betreff: = RE: RAC One Node - Instances not open at the same time!

Did I = miss a memo and service connection node preference is not available on = =E2=80=9COne Node?=E2=80=9D

 

My initial reaction is that = having one or the other node as preferred and then restarting the = service the opposite if a node is intentionally down would be a = reasonable solution that, for example, allows non-application work to = reside in the instance shared pool and possibly buffer cache of the = non-preferred instance.

 

Your mileage may = vary.

 

mwf

 

= From:= oracle-l-bounce@freelists.o= rg [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@free= lists.org] On Behalf Of Martin Klier - Performing Databases = GmbH
Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2017 5:24 AM
To: Ethan = Post
Cc: Martin Berger; Oracle-L oracle-l
Subject: = Re: RAC One Node - Instances not open at the same time!

 

= Ethan,

=  

= thank you very much.

= --
Martin Klier | Performing Databases GmbH
Managing Partner | = Senior DB Consultant
Oracle ACE

martin.klier@performing-db.com | https://www.performing-databases.com

=  

=

Von: = "Ethan = Post" <post.ethan@gmail.com>
An: = "martin klier" <martin.klier@performing-db.com>, "Martin = Berger" <martin.a.berger@gmail.com>
CC: = "Oracle-L oracle-l" <oracle-l@freelists.org>
Gesendet: = Montag, 3. Juli 2017 16:22:22
Betreff: RE: RAC One Node - = Instances not open at the same time!

2 = cents

 

My recommendation would be to = set up an alert that opens ticket, sends email/message etc=E2=80=A6when = two instances are running with an explanation of the reasons both should = not be open unless the potential for problems is truly high risk = issue.

 

The =E2=80=9Ctrigger=E2=80=9D = solution is good but if you are in a high turnover environment, moving = to cloud someday, cloning, replicating system, doing upgrades = etc=E2=80=A6there is a chance this will come back to bite someone = someday. It isn=E2=80=99t obvious enough, whereas the alert would be = very obvious.

 

So if you have big data/job = corruption issue then it needs to be enforced strictly, otherwise go = with an notify solution.

 

Thanks

 

From: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf = Of Martin Klier - Performing Databases GmbH
Sent: Monday, = July 3, 2017 5:53 AM
To: Martin Berger <martin.a.berger@gmail.com>
Cc: = Oracle-L oracle-l <oracle-l@freelists.org>
Subject: Re: = RAC One Node - Instances not open at the same = time!

 

= Martin,

=  

= sounds very cool. Thanks!

=  

= --
Martin Klier | Performing Databases GmbH
Managing Partner | = Senior DB Consultant
Oracle ACE

martin.klier@performing-db.com | https://www.performing-databases.com

=  

=

Von: "Martin Berger" <martin.a.berger@gmail.com>
An: = "Martin Klier" <martin.klier@performing-db.com>
CC: = "Oracle-L oracle-l" <oracle-l@freelists.org>
Gesendet: = Freitag, 30. Juni 2017 14:32:00
Betreff: Re: RAC One Node = - Instances not open at the same time!

Hi Martin, 

as this is an open discussion what's about this = concept: 

 

you write a startup trigger which immediately set 

alter system enable restricted session;

then it spools gv$instance until it's sure the other instance is = gone,

at the end do 

alter system disable restricted session;

 

that's maybe not a very elegant method, but it might solve your = request? 

 

(everything is untested right now on my side)

 

Martin

 

2017-06-30 13:22 GMT+02:00 Martin Klier - Performing Databases GmbH = <martin.klier@performing-db.com>:

= Why? It's an open concept discussion, no system was configured = yet.

= --
Martin Klier | Performing Databases GmbH
Managing Partner | = Senior DB Consultant
Oracle ACE

martin.klier@performing-db.com | https://www.performing-databases.com

=  

=

Von: "Mladen Gogala" <gogala.mladen@gmail.com>
An: oracle-l@freelists.org
Gesendet: = Freitag, 30. Juni 2017 00:21:30
Betreff: Re: RAC One Node = - Instances not open at the same time!

On 06/29/2017 07:24 AM, Martin Klier - Performing Databases GmbH = wrote:

= Hi Listers,

=  

= when running Oracle RAC One Node, is there a way to avoid both instances = being open at the same time?

=  

= Background:

= I have an application that's by no way ready for RAC (using dbms_jobs = and much more). But they want to use the benefits of One Node for = operating the cluster. All that's needed is a failover = cluster.

=  

Please post = the output of srvctl config db -d <DB name>.

-- 
Mladen Gogala
Oracle DBA
Tel: (347) =
321-1217

=  

 

 

=  

=  

=  

------=_NextPart_000_03E2_01D2F711.EF1F8250-- -- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l