RE: Some Dataguard is good, lots more must be better?

From: "Laimutis Nedzinskas" <Laimutis.Nedzinskas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 09:01:24 -0000


>From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Jay.Miller@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>You don't have to rebuild the standby after the primary is
upgraded/patched.  Basically, you just install the patch and then let
the apply run.

Correct. However if you have has no problem moving hot backup files from
primary to standby then you do not need to think about Yet Another
Process. Instead you can use just the same well known Create Standby DB
Process. Of course it takes more time during which your protection is
minimized down to one database. If this is not acceptable then I agree
that you have to train to do upgrades with standby in place. But
otherwise keep it simple is a good rule.

>You don't even need to rebuild the standby after failover if you have
time/opportunity to do a graceful failover.

I am not sure when it can happen in a real life. Usually you failover
when primary is very dead.


Fyrirvari/Disclaimer
http://www.landsbanki.is/disclaimer
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Some Dataguard is good, lots more must be better?
  - From: Mladen Gogala
- RE: Some Dataguard is good, lots more must be better? (specifically, when do most actual failovers really occur?)
  - From: Mark W. Farnham

RE: Some Dataguard is good, lots more must be better?

Other related posts: