Re: DR with ASM
- From: Harel Safra <harel.safra@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: D'Hooge Freek <Freek.DHooge@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 08 May 2010 20:57:42 +0300
(sending again - over quoting)
Freek,
The OP stated that he's using synchronous replication.
In such a replication a bit is not acknowledged as written to the
storage array until it was written to both the local and the remote
storage array (perhaps only to the cache).
Since the same write ordering is preserved the scenario in which the
main site fails should be the same as a server crash, i.e. oracle will
do crash recovery when you start up the server in the backup site. So
synchronous replication *should* be just as robust as server failure.
To test the "should" part, maybe a better way will be a forced split of
the SRDF/SAN copy pair and then startup the database and ASM.
Harel Safra
On 08/05/2010 13:45, D'Hooge Freek wrote:
Harel,
Maybe a bit off topic, but can you say that such a procedure is really a
realistic DR procedure?
When you have a real disaster, the replication would be suddenly disrupted, so
maybe a better test would be to disconnect the two storage boxes (not even
stopping the replication gently).
I'm wondering if this type of replication offers a bullet proof disaster
recovery solution.
It seems to me as being very vurnable to ASM corruption.
regards,
Freek D'Hooge
Uptime
Oracle Database Administrator
email: freek.dhooge@xxxxxxxxx
tel +32(0)3 451 23 82
http://www.uptime.be
disclaimer: www.uptime.be/disclaimer
_______________________________________
Other related posts:
