FreeLists / oracle-l / RE: Dynamic re-mastering in RAC

["Hameed, Amir" <Amir.Hameed@xxxxxxxxx>]

In the context of Oracle 11i applications, if the DR is not a good
choice in 9i2 then should one consider application partitioning ?

Thanks
-----Original Message-----
From: racdba-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:racdba-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Sudhi
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 1:43 AM
To: Hameed, Amir
Cc: racdba@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Dynamic re-mastering in RAC

One of the reasons is they couldn't fit into the main release of the 
kernel. Also I would consider the 10g code base to actually implement 
dynamic re-mastering.

Thanks,
-Sudhi.

Hameed, Amir wrote:
> Thanks KG!
> Interesting. I just checked in my 9.2.0.6 and 9.2.0.4 databases and
> parameter _lm_dynamic_remastering is set to FALSE (the default is
TRUE).
> Since this is a hidden parameter and therefore is not meant to be set
> without Oracle's permission, I wonder why Oracle 9i manuals talk about
> Dynamic Remastering if it is not  available out-of-the box in 9i2.
Also,
> is the reason that it is not available out-of-the-box is because the
> algorithm in 9i2 is not that effective?
> Any thoughts...
> 
> Thanks
> Amir
> -----Original Message-----
> From: racdba-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:racdba-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of K Gopalakrishnan
> Sent: Monday, August 01, 2005 8:56 PM
> To: racdba@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: Dynamic re-mastering in RAC
> 
> Amir:
> 
> The right answer to your question is it depends. There is no dynamic
> remastering in 9i RAC other than in 9204/9205 where the parameter
> (only) _lm_dynamic_remastering is set to true.
> 
> In 10gR1 dynamic remastering is set at file level and starting from R2
> the dynamic remastering is done at FILE+OBJECT Level. But conditions
> are very stringent. For example one instance should touch the blocks
> (of that object) 50 times more than the other instance in particular
> period (say 10 mins). These touch ratio and time can be tuned by
> _gc_affinity_limit and _gc_affinity_time parameters.
> 
> Regards,
> Gopal
> 
> 
> On 8/2/05, Hameed, Amir <Amir.Hameed@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>>
>>Folks, 
>>Is dynamic re-mastering done at the file-level or at the block level?
> 
> That
> 
>>is, does an instance master the entire datafile or only those blocks
> 
> that
> 
>>were repeatedly accessed from its buffer cache in a certain file? Is
> 
> there a
> 
>>way to identify/tell which file/block is mastered by a certain
> 
> instance?
> 
>>Thanks 
>>Amir 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Legal Disclaimer: The statements expressed here are of my own and do not

represent those of Yahoo Inc !

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l