| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
 |
 | |||
| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
|
| |||
Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> RE: Your views on Quest - Shareplex
The
person giving the presentation on Shareplex stated that there could
be no chained rows when the sharepex file, apparently analogous to the log miner
dictionary file is created.
<FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----From: Jacques Kilchoer
[mailto:Jacques.Kilchoer_at_quest.com]Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001
11:07 AMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject:
RE: Your views on Quest - Shareplex
> -----Original Message----- >
From: MacGregor, Ian A. [<A
href="mailto:ian_at_SLAC.Stanford.EDU">mailto:ian_at_SLAC.Stanford.EDU]
> > We are looking into the
product as well, but have yet to even > toy with
the product. There is a "no chained rows" >
restriction.
I'm not sure what that statement means. Shareplex will
replicate a table that has chained rows.
> Shareplex does not replicate transactions on
> sys objects. A table dropped on one
side will not be > dropped on the other. It
apparently will replicate truncates >
however. It's one thing to read the logs and to find the
> time when a truncate caused writes to the data
dictionary, > but quite another to reconstruct the
statement.
Statement from a developer of Shareplex: <FONT
size=2><<Interesting statement as this is how we replicate DML.
Providing functionality for DDL is not at all impossible for us. It is
just one of the things on the list of enhancements that we plan for SharePlex,
the priority of which is dependent on the market.>>
<SPAN
class=692125319-30052001>Truncate is not DML it is DDL.
I didn't say there was a problem extracting DML
statements. Oracle's log miner utility will do that.
I said that Shareplex, as per the person who gave the
presentation, will replicate truncates and marvelled at this
capability.
Let me relate my personal experience working with Shareplex
(BEFORE I was an employee with Quest Software). At a previous company we were
looking for a replication tool at a company that did payroll taxes. There were
large batch loads (bank records) every night, but especially at the end of
each quarter and at the end of the year. We wanted to ensure that the
replication tool we chose would be fast enough to keep up with the large data
loads. When we tested Oracle Replication and Quest Shareplex, we found that
Shareplex was significantly faster. I personally argued against it initially
for some of the reasons posters here have mentioned (e.g. it uses
"unsupported" means to accomplish its goal) but eventually we implemented
Shareplex and were satisfied with the result. There can be some manual effort
involved in reconciliation of discrepancies but we found that effort to be
minor. Another factor that influenced our decision is that we were intending
to use Shareplex for Oracle in co junction with Shareplex FS to replicate
datafiles created on the HP-UX server.
 |
 |