Re: Symantec Storage Foundation for Oracle RAC
- From: "Jingmin Zhai" <zhaijm@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: ken_nguyen@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 12:54:57 +0800
Hi, Ken
Storage Foundation for Oracle RAC (SFRAC) with Global Cluster Option (GCO)
together with storage layer replication (VVR from Symantec, SRDF from
EMC...) is sure a valid Disaster Recovery (DR) solution. You can look for
details from pre-sales of Symantec.
James
On 10/30/07, ken_nguyen@xxxxxxxxxxx <ken_nguyen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Tim-
>
> I'm not sure what you're trying to get at, and don't really see why you
> wouldn't come right out and say it, but anyway..
>
> So, the particular solution that I'm looking at employs a Global
> Clustering Option. So, whatever happens at the primary site to cause a
> failure (earthquake, wild fire, etc..) that the company deems as an outage,
> would kick off the remote site to come online as the primary database.
>
> Ken
>
>
> -------------- Original message --------------
> From: Tim Gorman <tim@xxxxxxxxx>
> Would an earthquake level just part of a data center? Do wildfires only
> burn the 3rd server in a rack and not the 4th, sparing the storage in the
> next cabinet over?
>
> In what way does RAC (or any clustering solution, such as SFOR) protect
> against such threats?
>
>
>
>
> ken_nguyen@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> Tim,
>
> As Finn mentioned, I'm looking at this to provide HA. This is for a
> location in SoCal, so its prone to earthquakes, and most recently, wild
> fires.
>
> Ken
>
>
> -------------- Original message --------------
> From: "Finn Jorgensen" <finn.oracledba@xxxxxxxxx><finn.oracledba@xxxxxxxxx>
> Tim,
>
> RAC/SFOR/HACMP/VCS etc are for high availability. Not disaster recovery.
> As such, it's for the type of "disasters" that involve losing 1 server.
> Anything else you would need a DR setup to handle.
>
> Finn
>
>
> On 10/29/07, Tim Gorman <tim@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Well......out of all the possible (and probable) range of faults and
> > failures, exactly what types of "disasters" does clustering such as RAC or
> > SFOR protect against?
> >
> >
> > ken_nguyen@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >
> > >It has to be a very selective disaster for clustering (i.e. RAC, HACMP,
> > etc) to provide much protection.
> >
> > Tim-
> >
> > Sorry, I don't understand what that means.
> >
> > Ken
> >
> >
> > -------------- Original message --------------
> > From: Tim Gorman <tim@xxxxxxxxx> <tim@xxxxxxxxx>
> > It has to be a very selective disaster for clustering (i.e. RAC, HACMP,
> > etc) to provide much protection.
> >
> >
> > ken_nguyen@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >
> > Dan, thanks for the feedback.
> >
> > We're trying to protect more than just the Oracle DB. While CRS and
> > Dataguard work well to provide HA, it doesn't take into account the Siebel,
> > IIS, etc installs that form the entire application stack.
> >
> > With this solution, we're hoping to lower the TCO in the event of a
> > disaster.
> >
> > Ken
> >
> >
> > -------------- Original message --------------
> > From: Dan Norris <dannorris@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <dannorris@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > I have used the SFOR previously, but not on the current versions and
> > not with 10g DB. I had no problems with the SFOR software.
> >
> > If I were implementing a cluster today with 10g, I wouldn't use any
> > non-Oracle clusterware. Instead, I'd just use Oracle Clusterware as it
> > provides all the HA you'll need for the DB. Maybe you have other reasons for
> > using SFOR...I hope you do because I couldn't justify the investment given
> > the current architecture.
> >
> > Others have posted similarly on this list and in OTN forums as well.
> >
> > Dan
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Ken Nguyen <ken_nguyen@xxxxxxxxxxx> <ken_nguyen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 4:46:05 AM
> > Subject: Symantec Storage Foundation for Oracle RAC
> >
> > We¢re looking to implement Symantec Storage Foundation HA for Oracle
> > RAC to offer HA for our Oracle 10g RAC on RHEL.
> >
> >
> >
> > Oracle has fully certified most of the components within this Symantec
> > solution, except for the automatic failover piece (GCO).
> >
> > This component is certified on all platforms except for Red Hat, could
> > have something to do with Oracle¢s OEL initiative.
> >
> >
> >
> > Is anyone using this or any other Symantec SF products without any
> > issues?
> >
> >
> >
> > Ken
> >
> > -- //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
>
> -- //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
>
Other related posts:
