Chris,
FYI I looked into usage of section size on our system, and ran into a
couple of bugs that you may want to look into:
Bug 20169408 : EXADATA: ORA-600 [KRBRPR_MSB_PIECES], [270], [256], []
Bug 24421668 : PARALLEL RECOVERY USING MULTISECTION INCREMENTAL BACKUP
FAILS WITH ORA-19638
(Note isn't parallellization the whoe point of section size :)
I think backports are available for 12.1 for both bugs
Regards
Patrick
On 20 February 2017 at 22:46, Chris Stephens <cstephens16@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Weekly level 0, daily level 1, hourly archivelogs. We plan to include
section size in our backup scripts.
On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 8:19 AM Niall Litchfield <
niall.litchfield@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
What is your backup approach? The unit of backup is generally the data
file. AFAIK RMAN parallel backup still doesn't automatically calculate
section size in the absence of declaring it. If your bigfiles aren't really
big, that's not a problem - but for terabyte-sized datafile backups to slow
media it will be.
On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 1:59 PM, Chris Stephens <cstephens16@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
We are in the process of building a new Exadata system that will host a
relatively large number of 12.1 EE RAC databases. We are trying to keep
everything as simple as possible and are currently planning on
standardizing on bigfile tablespaces for all application data.
Are there any downsides/reasons to not do this?
Thanks,
chris
--
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
http://www.orawin.info
