Re: Standby Database performance

rightoo alan :)
On 23 November 2011 19:23, Guillermo Alan Bort <cicciuxdba@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> <disclaimer>this is a strictly unhelpful comment </disclaimer>
> I'm curious as to why you want to further reduce the apply time. Are you
> experiencing a delay in the standby because it takes 45 seconds to apply
> the archivelogs?
>
> One of the key concepts of tuning in knowing when to stop, so perhaps if
> you are experiencing no problems with this apply time it's time to leave it
> be and move on to the next problem (there's always a next problem...
> otherwise life would be boring)
>
> hope that wasn't too unhelpful
> Alan.-
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 4:23 PM, kapil vaish <kapilvaish1@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi Guys ,
> >
> > we have physical standby database for one of our biggest database.
> Scripts
> > ship the archived log to standby server and then using parallel 32,
> manual
> > recovery is performed (thru scripts) . Archived log size is 2 GB and
> daily
> > production archive generation is aorund 2.5 TB. We are trying to increase
> > performance on our standby database. We tried tuning various standby
> > related parameters and IO, maximum apply rate we could achieve is 45 sec
> > per archive log.  Can you suggest any other tunings you may have seen in
> > your environments ? any pointers are appreciated ..
> >
> > thanks
> > kapil Vaish
> > --
> > http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
>
>


-- 
=============================================
TRUTH WINS AT LAST, DO NOT FORGET TO SMILE TODAY
=============================================


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


Other related posts: