Re: Nasty RAC Bug in 10g. If you are running multi-nodes and one instance or more is not normally running - Read this...

Hehe, at least now I know we're not the only shop using CDC (with or
without RAC)... it was certainly beginning to look like it. :)  We're
currently in the process of implementing Async Distributed Hotlog CDC,
although this is in an 11g RAC environment (currently 11.1.0.6, soon
to be 11.1.0.7).

We initially planned to use 10.2.0.4, but encountered a need to handle
some CLOB columns (which aren't supported under 10g).  The XMLType
columns are still a bit awkward, however.

On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 3:31 PM, Jeffery Thomas <jeffthomas24@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Thanks for posting this - a preemptive warning for us.    We run some
> RAC CDC-oriented databases in an active/passive configuration.    The
> reason we run active/passive is due to yet another bug, with Log
> Miner.      Oracle has provided a backport for the Log Miner bug, but
> attempting to apply the backport has been a bit problematic thus far:
>
> 1) Clone current $OH to test the backport.
> 2) Apply backport to cloned $OH  fails due to patch conflict,
> requiring a merge patch.
> 3) Apply merge patch to cloned $OH.
> 4) Attempt to modify the database $OH to the cloned $OH via srvctl.
> Fails, hit a bug with CRS dealing with db names in upper case, fixed
> in CRS patch bundle.
> 5) Decided not to apply the recommended CRS patch bundle, and use
> workaround of srvctl remove / add database.
> 6) Database has been moved to the cloned $OH that has the backport.
> 7) Can't keep both instances up due to encountering still another bug
> which requires applying another 10.2.0.4 patch bundle.
>
> - Jeff
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 3:12 AM, Robert Freeman <robertgfreeman@xxxxxxxxx> 
> wrote:
>>
>> So, we ran into a nasty bug last night. We are running 10g (various 
>> releases) RAC on 3 or 4 node clusters. In this particular configuration we 
>> had a 4 node cluster, with an instance for this database on each node. 2 
>> instances were active, two were configured but not running.
>>
>> DBA went to make redo log adjustments (adding a new group) and database 
>> crashed. There is a bug in 10g (and apparently 11g) with respect to this 
>> kind of configuration. If you are running an active/passive kind of RAC 
>> configuration, you will want to read up on the bug. Be very careful making 
>> any online redo log changes if you are running in such an environment.
>>
>> Metalink bug number is 6786022 and it's public. We understand patch is in QA 
>> to correct. There is also an event you can set to avoid the problem. See the 
>> bug on Metalink for more information.
>>
>> I'll also be posting a copy of this on my Blog...
>>
>> Cheers to all!
>>
>> RF
>>
>>
>>  Robert G. Freeman
>> Author:
>> Blog: http://robertgfreeman.blogspot.com
>> OCP: Oracle Database 11g Administrator Certified Professional Study Guide 
>> (Sybex)
>> Oracle Database 11g New Features (Oracle Press)
>> Portable DBA: Oracle  (Oracle Press)
>> Oracle Database 10g New Features (Oracle Press)
>> Oracle9i RMAN Backup and Recovery (Oracle Press)
>> Oracle9i New Features (Oracle Press)
>> Other various titles out of print now...
>> The LDS Church is looking for DBA's. You do have to be a Church member in
>> good standing. A lot of kind people write me, concerned I may be breaking
>> the law by saying you have to be a Church member. It's legal I promise! :-)
>> --
>> http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>>
>>
>>
> --
> http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
>
>



-- 
"I'm too sexy for my code." - Awk Sed Fred.
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l


Other related posts: