RE: ok this sounds crazy BUT, is it a bug
- From: TESTAJ3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- To: "Mark W. Farnham" <mwf@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 13:45:37 -0400
Mark, thanks, i'm thinking its a bug, its just interesting that I can say
"use redo, not archive but do it on delay also",
oh well just have to keep the issue in mind if/when we implement.
thanks, joe
_______________________________________
Joe Testa, Oracle Certified Professional
(Work) 614-677-1668
(Cell) 614-312-6715
Interested in helping out your marriage?
Ask me about "Weekend to Remember"
Dec 11-13, 2009 here in Columbus.
From:
"Mark W. Farnham" <mwf@xxxxxxxx>
To:
<TESTAJ3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "'Martin Klier'" <usn@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc:
<oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:
08/04/2009 01:35 PM
Subject:
RE: ok this sounds crazy BUT, is it a bug
So if you force Oracle into the Hobson’s choice of obeying your delay
versus stopping updates on the primary they allow your delay to be
comprimised to keep things rolling. I believe that is a bug. Here is my
reasoning: Injection of a delay is a security and/or safety mechanism
which must always trump performance (even a temporary hang.) Of course you
can logically infinitely (and indefinitely within the space available)
extend the wrap window by adding online log groups, so there is always and
out. This is essentially the same situation as archiver stuck due to no
available space on the archive device, and consistent logic should be
applied in unwrapping the dilemna.
So I think they should be making the other choice to the degree that I
would call it a bug. On the other hand, even if you agree with me that it
is a bug, it is a bug that for all practical purposes you can avoid.
I hope what I just wrote makes sense to all y’all.
Joe you push the coolest corner cases going.
Regards,
mwf
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of TESTAJ3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 12:23 PM
To: Martin Klier
Cc: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: ok this sounds crazy BUT, is it a bug
Well i forced enough log switches to have gone thru all of the redo logs,
and that forced it across, I'm thinking that even though I asked to redo
log delay, its really falling back to archive logs apply, time to go and
dig in the DRC*.logs.
thanks, joe
_______________________________________
Joe Testa, Oracle Certified Professional
(Work) 614-677-1668
(Cell) 614-312-6715
<snip>
Other related posts:
