Re: RAC node distance
- From: Martin Berger <martin.a.berger@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: veeeraman@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 06:45:13 +0100
Ram,
I was discussing exactly these issues this week - only the distance is
about 10 kilometers in our case.
Beside the need for a good network interface the solution only makes
sense with a storage subsystem on every side. In fact you even need a
3rd storage for at least 1 voting disk.
In my situation, noone wants to pay for 2 storage systems; the
discussion ended there really fast => no geocluster; no DataGuard.
I do not see a big advantage in an 'active-passive' config. Especially
as your application servers are distributed, they will have to
communicate to the 'other side'.
Martin
Am 25.03.2010 um 04:20 schrieb Ram Raman:
Hi
We have a 2 node RAC for one of our new applications. There are 2
sets of application/web servers; each set located on different
building separated by about 3 city blocks. But, both the RAC nodes
are in one of the buildings. The management seemed to be inclined to
want to separate them in different buildings. To me that does not
sound like a great idea, with interconnect traffic and such.
Questions:
1) Are there any sites that use RAC 'geo-cluster' mode?
2) Would running the RAC in 'active-passive' mode help in case of
geo cluster type solution? What kind of interconnect is used by
sites that have geo cluster type RACs?
PS. I am aware that RAC is not a DR solution, going for a dataguard
would be a good DR solution.
Ram.
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
