Re: Archived Redo Logs Written After Creation of a Flash Recovery Area

bfogarty_at_gaports.com wrote:
> I am converting a preexisting 10gR2 database to use a flash recovery
> area and am confused about the creation of archived redo logs.
>
> My spfile.ora parameters are:
>
> *.db_recovery_file_dest='/orabackt/EIST'
> *.db_recovery_file_dest_size=10G
>
> *.log_archive_dest_1='LOCATION=USE_DB_RECOVERY_FILE_DEST MANDATORY
> REOPEN=60'
> *.log_archive_dest_10=''
> *.log_archive_dest_2='LOCATION=/t13/admin/EIST/arch'
> *.log_archive_format='EIST_%t_%s_%r.arc'
>
> After converting to the flash recovery area the archived redo logs
> written to log_archive_dest_2 are:
> /t13/admin/EIST/arch $ ls -ltr
> -rw-r----- 1 oracle dba 2619904 Oct 10 17:05
> EIST_1_4596_463323396.arc
> -rw-r----- 1 oracle dba 216064 Oct 10 17:17
> EIST_1_4597_463323396.arc
> Their names follow the format defined by parameter log_archive_format.
>
> The archived redo logs written to the flash recovery area are:
> /orabackt/EIST/EIST/archivelog/2007_10_10 $ ls -ltr
> -rw-r----- 1 oracle dba 2619904 Oct 10 17:05
> o1_mf_1_4596_3jthmvww_.arc
> -rw-r----- 1 oracle dba 216064 Oct 10 17:17
> o1_mf_1_4597_3jtjcxgf_.arc
>
>
> I had expected the archived redo logs to be written to /orabackt/EIST,
> since that was the value assigned to db_recovery_file_dest. Is it
> normal for these additional levels of subdirectories to be defined?
> /orabackt/EIST/EIST/archivelog/2007_10_10
>
> Is it normal for the archived redo logs in these two destinations to
> have different file names?
> EIST_1_4596_463323396.arc vs. o1_mf_1_4596_3jthmvww_.arc
>
> Thank you,
> Bill

You are getting yourself wrapped around the axle dealing with irrelevancies.

Go to Morgan's Library at www.psoug.org
Scroll down to Flashback Database
The exact steps are there ready for cut-and-paste

-- 
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)
Puget Sound Oracle Users Group
www.psoug.org