GoldenGate and DataGuard are two different products with two different
1. DataGuard is for disaster recovery and used mostly for physical standby
2. GoldGate is a logical replication tool.
GoldenGate allows you to move data in real-time. If your database has a lot of
transactions the extract process will capture transactions and use memory
between 5M-50M depending on the amount of data that is being captured. The
memory requirement though has been shifted into the database so you would
actually need to have a STREAMS_POOL_SIZE of 1.25G allocated for the integrated
extract. Classic Extract was deprecated in 18.1.
Long running transactions can be managed by using the CACHEMGR and the Bound
Recovery (BR) settings. Depending on how far back you have to go, retention of
archive logs would be needed.
For GoldenGate, remember that the definition of lag is commit-to-commit. So a
large transaction could potentially increase your lag. In newer versions of
GoldenGate this has been addressed by using the integrated extract and the
parallel replicat. This lowers the lag and allows you a few different options
for how transactions are applied on the target side.
Overall, both GoldenGate and DataGuard allow you to build a remote site. Which
product to use depends on your use case and architecture.
On Jan 13, 2020, at 2:16 PM, Ram Raman <veeeraman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Can we consider GG (goldengate) for replication of our multi TB data
warehouse. Anything nuances, surprises there? Between GG and Dataguard which
one can be a better product.
Licensing cost is NOT an issue.