Re: 10.2 listener won't start on same port as 9.2 listener
- From: Paul Drake <bdbafh@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: DGoulet@xxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 16:39:08 -0400
When the functionality for "RESTRICTED SESSION" changed in 10g, a separate
listener was required for accessing the restricted database instance from a
remote host (with the "main" listener stopped).
Having a separate gigabit network from the main fast ethernet LAN, where the
SDU/TDU is set to a larger size to support database links (although jumbo
ethernet frames do not work due to incompatibility between vendors packet
sizes - the mostestest^^2 stupidest^^2 thing I've seen in years) we have a
separate listener setup. (reminds me of the 1,000,000 vs 1,048,576
discussion not long ago).
With being able to groom the listener log file via the SET LOG_FILE command
in lsnrctl, I don't see a need for running 2 listeners just so that one can
be cycled to groom the log.
Where we have shared servers configured with dispatchers to handle VPNs with
few known ports, we use a separate listener.
In the case or where a client is going to use response time of generating
200 application logons simultaneously as a performance metric ... you might
think about running as many listeners as CPUs (I'm not kidding).
Paul
Other related posts:
