Re: Logical Standby Questions
- From: "Mark Strickland" <strickland.mark@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 09:51:54 -0700
Oracle Support verified that, even though the failed update statements
as reported in v$logstdby_events include rowid in the WHERE clauses,
SQL Apply drops that clause before it applies the statement. That's
what I would have expected but seeing rowid in the SQL statement threw
me off, so I thought that maybe SQL Apply actually does use rowid. I
didn't think it did. So, my theory that the logical standby wasn't
handling row migration properly was probably off-base.
Oracle Support has little help so far. I'm going to try to replicate
the problem in a test environment. This is alarming. We're not yet
reliant on the logical standby for reporting but we will be relying on
it sometime in the next few months. I was under the impression that
Logical Standby in 10g was ready for prime-time. I'm starting to
question that assumption.
On the bright side, I was happy that the re-instantiation of a
million-row, 450-Mb table only took a few minutes. Looks like the
INSTANTIATE_TABLE procedure uses Data Pump, rather than just a
straight select over the database link.
Regards,
Mark Strickland
On 7/15/06, Mark Strickland <strickland.mark@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I figured out that I had to grant LOGSTDBY_ADMINISTRATOR to the schema
owner in the primary database. I granted it only to the schema owner
in the logical standby. I did the grant and was able to
re-instantiate my test table.
Regarding the other issues with failed transactions, I found document
#5256179 which seems to match our problem but I didn't see any
evidence that the customer got the problem resolved. I'm suspecting
that the logical standby isn't handling row migration very well. In
the failed update transactions, the rowids don't match between the
primary and the logical standby for the given row (tables have primary
keys).
Mark
On 7/15/06, Mark Strickland <strickland.mark@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 10.1.0.3 RAC with Data Guard on Solaris 9.
>
> Last week, we added columns to a couple of tables in Production and
> set the column values to zero. All applications had been shut down.
> No other DML was possible. When that DDL and DML reached the logical
> standby it caused a major hairball in the standby. I've opened an SR
> of course and done my due diligence by searching Metalink and Google
> and the docs. Not coming up with any answers. SQL Apply continued to
> fail after encountering failed updates to one of the tables that got a
> new column. SQL Apply kept failing even if I restarted it with "skip
> failed transaction". Finally, last night, I set that table to be
> skipped and restarted SQL Apply and after a few more hiccups with
> other tables and a few more restarts, SQL Apply caught up with the
> primary which was 400 logs ahead by end of day yesterday. I now need
> to re-instantiate the table that was skipped. I'm testing the process
> in a 10.1.0.5 test environment and, when I issue
>
> DBMS_LOGSTDBY.INSTANTIATE_TABLE,
>
> I get
>
> ORA-31631: privileges are requiried
> ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_LOGSTDBY", line 392
> ORA-06512: at line 1
>
> I traced the session and didn't find a clear explanation in the trace
> file. I did grant LOGSTDBY_ADMINISTRATOR to the schema owner and even
> granted DBA and SYSDBA to the account. Has anyone encountered a
> problem with INSTANTIATE_TABLE?
>
> Regards,
> Mark Strickland
> Next Online Technologies
> Seattle, WA
>
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
