premmehrotra_at_hotmail.com (Prem K Mehrotra) wrote in message news:<43441e77.0408160942.ff7b3b7_at_posting.google.com>...
> Is n't SharePlex more like Oracle9i logical standby dataguard than
> physical syandby data guard. If I am not mistaken, SharePlex like
> Oracle has limitaions that some types cannot be replicated, i.e., long
> or anything defined using create type.
>
> Does SharePlex have anything like Oracle's physical standby where
> everything can be replicated.
Yes, that's a good definition. However, the biggest difference between
them is that Quest is doing logical replications for years and Oracle
started with them with 9i. So, Shareplex is much more mature and
flexible. You can use it for example for migrating 8i -> 9i, it can
handle inconsistencies, you can easily stop and restart again in any
phase, has friendlier interface, you can define its own unique indexes
for tables without enforced uniqueness, can handle sequences etc.
Shareplex has only two mayor problems, it hates chained_rows and LOBs.
It can processed them, but initialization phase (that means
unavailability period) can easily grow to hours. :-(
I'm sure that one day Oracle's logical database will be a perfect
match for SharePlex, but it's not happening yet.
--
Dusan Bolek
http://www.db-support.com
Email: spambin_at_seznam.cz
Pls add "Not Guilty" to the subject, otherwise your email will face an
unpleasant end as SPAM.
Received on Tue Aug 17 2004 - 01:22:26 CDT
