Re: Snapshot Logfile
- From: Sami Seerangan <dba.orcl@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: cjpengel.dbalert@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 17:26:19 -0400
Hi Carel
I completely agree with you about the naming convention. Since I am doing
some POC, I didn't really care about the database name.
We are going to have some common name like "PROD"(or similar name) for both
Primary and Standby sites.
We really don't know which site is going to be primary and secondary (both
have equal hardware capacity & other resources).
Thanks
Sami
On 8/28/05, Carel-Jan Engel <cjpengel.dbalert@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Sami,
>
> Yes, that should work. The Rule of thumb form the doc probably should read
> '(max.nr.of log file groups for each thread +1 ) * maximum number of
> threads.'
> but the result will be the same. Alas, I've no DG/RAC experience yet, I
> might be wrong here.
>
> I do not particularly like your direcotroy naming, though. You use a
> directory named 'primary'. This suggests you have a directory 'standby'
> somewhere as well. What if you have to perform a switchover/failover? The
> name of the directory will no longer resemble it's role by then. You will
> have to deal with a confusing setup by then, where compnents of the primary
> actually are named standby and vice versa. This will make you system more
> (human) error prone.
>
> My advice is to keep systems on both ends as symmetric as possible, using
> the same direcory structure and instance/database names at both ends. That
> implies that naming conventions should avoid embedding roles in the names.
> Compare it with 'meaningless keys' in data modeling, which might survive
> longer than meaningfull keys. (I don't want to get that discussion loose
> here, and if it starts I will not contribute)
>
> A meaningfull name of a server, directory, instance or database can and
> will become problematic. One day, it's role will change and the name will
> start confusing you ISO of helping you. And that is something you do not
> want in an environment that is presumed to be highly available!
>
> Best regards,
>
> Carel-Jan Engel
>
> ===
> If you think education is expensive, try ignorance. (Derek Bok)
> ===
>
> On Sun, 2005-08-28 at 11:28 -0400, Sami Seerangan wrote:
>
> Carel,
>
> You are right. I meant Standby logfile (not snapshot logfile). The 14 rows
> output is cut & paste mistake (it should be 12 Rows).
>
> rule of thumb:
> '(max.nr.of logfiles for each thread +1 ) * maximum number of threads.'
>
> So in my case I should have [ (3+1)*2=8 ] Stanby logfiles. Is that right?
>
>
> I can simply add 8 stanpshot logfiles as below. Right?
>
>
> ALTER DATABASE ADD STANDBY LOGFILE GROUP 11
> ('/u01/oradata/primary/sredo11.log') size 10M;
> :
> :
>
> ALTER DATABASE ADD STANDBY LOGFILE GROUP 18
> ('/u01/oradata/primary/sredo18.log') size 10M;
>
> Thanks
> Sami
>
>
>
>
Other related posts:
