Re: Replication technology suggestion

  • From: Sandeep Dubey <dubey.sandeep@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: davewendelken@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 11:47:23 -0400


You got it right. Alexandria nd Boston are one way replicating to
Chatlotte. Database at Charlotte is also getting data as a master for
Charlotte deployment and is not replicating to any other database.

On 7/14/05, david wendelken <davewendelken@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Example: deployment machines in these cities:
> Alexandria  --> Replicates to Charlotte.
>                       Boston never receives a copy of the Alexandria changes.
> Boston       --> Replicates to Charlotte.
>                      Alexandria never receives a copy of the Boston Changes
> Charlotte    --> Receives changes from Alexandria, Boston and Charlotte.
>                       Tells no one about changes.
> If Charlotte goes down, changes originating in Charlotte are unavailable.
> Is that what you envision happening?
> If not, please explain using this simple example set up.
> >In case any primary database is down we would like to use the
> >secondary database to become primary. We are not planning 24 by 7
> >solution. But in case of long outage we would like to serve from
> >secondary site if possible.
> Could synonyms and database links do the trick for this?
> Any gotchas?

In case of long outage at any master site we can point to the
Secondary site at Charlotte, I am trying to figure out what it will
take to refresh back the
master when we aready to make the tranfser.



Other related posts: