FreeLists / oracle-l / Re: RAC Vs Standby Database between Primary and Secondary Data Centers

[Nigel Thomas <nigel_cl_thomas@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dick

What about "stretch clusters"? You can (allegedly) separate your RAC nodes by 
several kilometres (up to 30 miles/50 km seems to be regarded as acceptable). 
Of course that has an impact on interconnect speed so you'd also probably want 
to partition your workload very carefully - but the theory is plausible (it had 
better be - my current project is expecting to use a stretch cluster).

So if one data center goes down (maybe it was just short of runway 271 at 
Heathrow the other day), you still have one/some of your nodes in the surviving 
centre...

Regards Nigel



----- Original Message ----
From: "Goulet, Dick" <richard.goulet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 3:24:26 PM

Bob,

    RAC is not a High Availability solution in and of itself.  RAC [snip] ... 
will protect you against a
single server failure in your local data center.  Standby can protect
you against a single server failure as well, but adds protection for a
9/11 incident at the same time..

______________________________________________________________
Dick Goulet / Capgemini
-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bob Robert
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 4:16 PM

Gurus,

I need your opinion regarding setting up High Availability solution
between Primary and Secondary Data Centers. Is it better to go with
Oracle RAC or Oracle Standby database.

Thanks In Advance,
Bob
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l