Re: Architecture Question

Bagavath

For reporting and DW needs, I would agree with Stephane for Data Guard setup. Be advised that right now, the need might be a reporting environment and
slowly, it will evolve into a need for a reporting/DR environment. So, in my opinion, going with this kind of architecture would be better in the medium/long
term.

For a subset data replication - Materialized views OR Advanced replication OR streams. Each case being dependent upon the scope of replication.

-Rajeev

On 12/20/06, Bagavath <bagavath_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Stepahne & Ajay
>
> Thanks for your input. I do understand it has to be logical standby. Right
> now we are evaluating 10g for some other requirements. May be this could be
> an added reason for moving to it. We ruled out MVs because of the
> application DB design, transaction rate and the DW requirements to capture
> history. The refresh frequency seemed too high in that case in order to
> capture all the changes happening in the primary db and reflect on the
> secondary.
>
>
> On 12/20/06, Ajay <ajay_1ajay_at_yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > Have you considered MV replication?
> > How big is the database?
> > I agree with Stephane that Dataguard - logical stabndby on 9i is not
> > really good. About streams - I did not understand if he means that advanced
> > replication means streams meaning both are same. I think they are not. In
> > any case streams also has issues on 9i. So your options are advanced
> > replication and MV.
> >
> > *Stephane Faroult <sfaroult_at_roughsea.com> *wrote:
> >
> > If you want to read from your secondary database, then Dataguard should
> > use logical standby - and I wouldn't use it in a production environment in
> > 9.2, it still has many teething problems (understand that it's very
> > buggy). I haven't had the opportunity yet to give it another shot with 10R2.
> > Advanced replication, today, means streams. Streams isn't totally painless,
> > and works better, I think, with a continuous flow than with bursts that take
> > some time to process (but you don't seem to want near real-time replication,
> > do you? I guess that if in the worst case you have a couple of minutes delay
> > it will be OK).
> > If I were you, I think that I'd try to convince whomever it may concern
> > to use Oracle 10R2, and test thoroughly Dataguard in this environment,
> > because your case just looks like a Dataguard case study. Short of that, I'd
> > probably opt (after due testing) for streams, but it's somewhat of an
> > overkill (you'll be using only a fraction of features).
> > HTH
> > Stéphane Faroult
> >
> >
> >
> > *On Mar Dec 19 5:19 , Bagavath sent:
> >
> > *
> >
> > hi all,
> > > im new to architechture decision making. we have to decide on a set
> > > up where we have to replicate data from the main application db to a
> > > secondary one for reporting. since this would be a real time application
> > > with a high transaction rate, we have decided to go for a secondary db for
> > > reporting and other needs.
> > >
> > We are looking at
> > > Oracle Dataguard
> > > Streams
> > > Advanced Replication
> > > This secondary would feed DW loads too.. Any suggestions please ? DB
> > > ver is 9.2. Also we have a specific requirement where we have to
> > > replicate multiple sources to the same target DB.
> > >
> >
> > thanks
> > Bagavath
> >
> >

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l