Re: db_recovery_dest pointing to 100Tb file system
From: Howard Latham <howard.latham_at_gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 14:47:30 +0000
Message-ID: <713d96d11001150647h435d1488q3410bc320db96244_at_mail.gmail.com>
Shortest Reply ever! 1 is best because you know always know where it is going and no config changes will be required. - The only only downside is if the recovery area goes off line. If you only have 1 then you have a singe point of failure - bit of a no no.But I if you have space on your server for a temporary area in case of failure then I would still go for 1 Very big recovery area.
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 14:47:30 +0000
Message-ID: <713d96d11001150647h435d1488q3410bc320db96244_at_mail.gmail.com>
Shortest Reply ever! 1 is best because you know always know where it is going and no config changes will be required. - The only only downside is if the recovery area goes off line. If you only have 1 then you have a singe point of failure - bit of a no no.But I if you have space on your server for a temporary area in case of failure then I would still go for 1 Very big recovery area.
2010/1/15 Howard Latham <howard.latham_at_gmail.com>
> 1
>
> 2010/1/15 hrishy <hrishys_at_yahoo.co.uk>
>
> Hi
>>
>> I have a 25TB database for which i need to configure a recoery area.
>> is it advisable to configure a single filesystem of 100Tb as recovery area
>> or configure 5-8 filesystems adding to 100Tb .
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Howard A. Latham
>
>
>
-- Howard A. Latham -- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-lReceived on Fri Jan 15 2010 - 08:47:30 CST