Thanks very much for your reply, Yavor! This was exactly the information I was looking for. Yes, I'll be testing before doing the real prod upgrade but having prior warnings is always much appreciated!! Leng. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Leng Kaing Senior Oracle DBA Hansen Technologies; 2 Frederick St; Doncaster 3108 Ph: +61-3-9840-3832 -----Original Message----- From: Yavor Ivanov [mailto:Yavor_Ivanov@xxxxxxxx] Sent: Wednesday, 6 September 2006 1:16 AM To: Leng Kaing; oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: 9.2.0.3 Upgrade 9.2.0.7 -basic Advanced Replication/Materialized View Hi, Leng I have setup with 12 servers running (1 master and 11 snapshot sites) with > 1000 snapshots on ~10 groups replicating to any of the sites. We have some very andavnced things like 3-tier replication, triggers, etc. I've managed this system for years, and I can tell you there is nothing special for any patch/upgrade/migration (I'we walked the path form 8i->9iR1->9iR2->10gR1). In fact, there was only one very nasty bug in 8i->9i migration, but this is not your case. So, in brief: just do anything as in the docs and you will not have any problems. But there are some things you could do, just to be sure: - first, push all deffered transactions form mview site to master site. - ensure job_queue_processes is 0 (this is written in the upgrade guide also, but it is very important for your case) - do backup of the system you are going to patch/upgrade/migrate - upgrade - TEST! test with just one snapshot, or one transaction, in each direction. If the master is catching transactions, if snapshot site is catching transactions, is everything replicated fine and so on. If something gets messy and you need to restore from a backup, you will have to regenerate the snapshot you've tested with. - if everything is fine with one mview, test if the whole group is refreshed fine. I foud a bug with mviews upgraded to 10g form 9i if they were initialy created in 8i -> then you can not refresh the group (well, there is walkarround). - if everything is fine again, let JOB_WUEUE_PROCESSES be more. Regards, Yavor Ivanov Senior Database Expert Stemo Ltd On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 11:39:59 +0300, Leng Kaing <Leng.Kaing@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Guys, > > > We've got basic Advanced Replication (yes, basic Advanced!!) implemented > on one of our 9.2.0.3 databases. The set up is a single group, with 200+ > tables in it. (Hey, I took over this system after the guy who initially > set it up left so I had no say in this matter!) We have materialized > view logs capturing the changes. The slave is on a client site for which > I am not responsible but I think they'll still need our help of the > upgrade causes any issues at their end. > > > So can you please share any experiences with upgrading Adv. Rep. from > 9.2.0.3 to 9.2.0.7? Is it just as simple as ensuring that the MLOG$ > tables are empty (after a refresh) and the following the normal upgrade > notes for 9.2.0.7? I've upgraded databases without Adv. Rep. before but > have not done it on databases running Adv. Rep. let alone materialised > views. Any gotchas or bugs I need to be aware of? What about the slave? > Can it remain on its Oracle version? No, I don't know what version they > are running over there. > > > TIA, > > > Leng. > Notice: This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may contain legally privileged information and/or copyright material of Hansen Technologies Limited or third parties. Copying, distributing, disclosing, commercialising or otherwise acting in reliance on this e-mail and any attachments is strictly prohibited unless you are the addressee of this e-mail and have written permission to do so. If you have received this e-mail in error please delete this e-mail (including any copies and attachments) and contact Hansen Technologies Limited by return e-mail or by telephone on + 61 3 9840 3000. Any views expressed in this e-mail are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of or be a commitment by the organisation, except where the individual sender has the authority and expressly states them to be so. -- //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l