RE: DataGuard
- From: Carel-Jan Engel <cjpengel.dbalert@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: Brandon.Allen@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 01:22:35 +0100
Brandon,
If the system is important for the business, they (the business) should
provide enough (budget for enough) bandwidth. If they can afford the
money for an extra server, with extra Oracle EE licenses, having a
proper line with enough bw. shouldn't be a very difficult business
case.
If you follow the suggestion to use the local standby as a buffer for
redo forwarding, be aware that an unknown amount of redo is not sent to
the DR site at any given point in time. If at that point the disaster
strikes, you will loose transactions. If the business is aware of that
risk, and made the trade-off, fine! Let them confirm that to you in
writing. Too often they are unaware, and the technicians get blamed in
the event of a failover to the DR-site, loosing important transactions.
Just because the techies were responible for the HA solution. Wrong.
Management doesn't make housekeeping responsible for insuring the
building either.
Consider using hardware line cards to compress the redo traffic. Use QOS
on the routers to prioritize the data sent on the portnumber you choose
for redo transport. People might come up with the suggestion of using
ssh tunneling with compression. IMHO: Too cumbersome for HA. You need an
extra process, it will consume CPU, it can fail, needs monitoring, etc.
James Morle used Cisco line cards at a DG site we set up and they got
typically 4:1 compression. They were appr. $1000 each. No setup, no
worries, no monitoring.
Finally: is the application optimized for minimized redo generation?
Best regards,
Carel-Jan Engel
===
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance. (Derek Bok)
===
On Mon, 2007-01-15 at 16:48 -0700, Allen, Brandon wrote:
> I'm not questioning Carel-Jan's recommendation at all - I think he has
> more DG knowledge in his pinky than I'll ever have, but just passing
> on a case where cascading setup might be appropriate/necessary:
>
> We have been struggling to get a standard (single standby) DG setup
> working for the last few months because our network connection isn't
> sufficient to keep up with the rate of our redo generation and when
> the transfer of archived logs falls behind far enough, it eventually
> freezes the production database. We're using ARCH to transfer the
> logs and already tried upgrading to 9.2.0.8 and setting the hidden
> parameter _log_archive_callout='LOCAL_FIRST=true', but we still see
> this behavior. Oracle Support's recommendation is to implement a
> cascading standby where we ship the logs to a local standby first and
> then go from the local to the remote so that the local standby
> operates as a buffer to keep the slow network from halting our
> primary. We are considering their recommendation, but going to try
> everything else we can think of to avoid it first, which will probably
> include upgrading to 10.2 because supposedly this problem no longer
> occurs in 10g, but that's the same thing we were told about 9.2.0.7
> with the local_first=true setting (Metalink 260040.1) and we're not
> very confident based on our experience with that config.
>
> Of course another option that we're considering is increasing the
> network bandwidth to the remote destination, but we would really like
> to have dataguard configured such that it will absolutely never impair
> production performance because even with the increased bandwidth,
> there is always the possibility of WAN problems, someone accidentally
> clogging the pipe with other large files, etc.
>
> Carel-Jan, if you have any recommendations, we'd love to hear them!
>
> Thanks,
> Brandon
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Carel-Jan Engel
> Sent: Monday, January 15, 2007 4:12 PM
>
>
>
> Stay away from cascaded redo transport as far as you can. You simply
> don't want that in HA environments. As Miracleas.dk states:
> '..Complexity is the enemy of availability...' (and I'd like to add:
> '.. but the friend of consultancy...' J). Imagine a switchover with
> cascaded transport. The whole redo transport stack has to be
> reinvented. A star-configuration (primary points to both standbys) is
> much easier to setup.
>
> Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message
> or attachments hereto. Please advise immediately if you or your
> employer do not consent to Internet email for messages of this kind.
> Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message that do
> not relate to the official business of this company shall be
> understood as neither given nor endorsed
Other related posts:
