Re: Re[2]: 2 Node RAC Standby -- A mix of Managed Recovery and Read only?

  • From: Steven Patenaude <spatenau@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: kamusis@xxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 11:46:29 -0600

On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 20:02:17 +0800, Kamus <kamusis@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Sorry, I don't think so.
> First, the storage is cheaper and cheaper this days, buy onemore cheap
> dell-emc Storage System maybe enough.
> Second, by setting up 2 independent standby databases we could get a
> much more flexible anti-disaster environment. such as 1 be a physical
> and the other be a logical, or 1 be a instant apply and the other be a
> delayed apply, etc...

While _we_ know the one true way, management often doesn't agree that
disk hardware, maintenance costs, datacenter floor space, etc. is
cheap (or cheap enough).

I don't remember (and need to get on with my day job), does a standby
database continue to catch the redo stream (but not apply it) while it
is in readonly mode?  If so, you could alternate the standby between
readonly and "catch up" modes as needed.

> Though oracle said standby database support RAC, at least so far I won't
> use this function.

Obviously the standby can be configured for RAC but I agree about only
having one instance up.  The documentation says you can have one
instance catch the redo stream and another apply it.  Has anyone tried
this?  It seems to me this would be added complexity (and chances for
problems) with very minimal performance gains.


Other related posts: