Re: Some Dataguard is good, lots more must be better?

  • From: "LS Cheng" <exriscer@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: kevinc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 21:47:26 +0200


Recently I was on a site who run a DG for each instance, the server with
highest number of instance was 4 though. In total they have around 12
instances so 12 DG. Whenever they have a new instance they create a new
Service Guard package which includes a ORACLE_HOME (right now for example
they have 12 ORACLE_HOME), a new DG.

For a 1.5TB new Database with static data I suggested to create a new
instance, they were cautious because that meant a lot of work!


On 9/17/06, Kevin Closson <kevinc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I know some of you folks have large SMPs as the result of consolidating from a lot of little SMPs into one large one for managability sake. What about distaster recovery? If you have, say, 20 databases in a large SMP, do you set up 20 "streams" of DG to a DR site? Is that a nightmare? Are there any sites out there that have, say, more than 10 databases that require disaster protection where DG is the tool of choice? Or do such sites opt to replicate at the storage (or volume e.g., Veritas VVR) level?

Yes, Carel-Jan will remind us  that replicating at the storage level
requires replication of
all writes as opposed to just sending redo pieces…

Thoughts ?

Other related posts: