Re: Minimize recovery time

From: Pap <oracle.developer35_at_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 13:12:51 +0530
Message-ID: <CAEjw_fgvLhPYBAWM_7bh7J4EsFUT9-r3_-VA-q=FvJ-KJKt55g_at_mail.gmail.com>



Others can correct here but with current use cases, as you mentioned your on premise primary and physical standby are already on Oracle Exadata. So I don't think you will get a similar Oracle exadata engineered system(mainly wrt the engineered storage cells) on AWS EC2 for your second physical standby/dataguard with delayed log apply. On AWS that would be a simple non exadata like environment with oracle software running on it and you may lose some of the features like automatic indexing, in memory rac etc if using currently. And I am not sure if applying redo logs from a primary exadata to a physical standby non-exa can be possible or can cause any issue during recovery or can cause issues in log apply itself etc.Also your application may not really able to run on that environment with same speed then on that non exa database.

Or else you may just live with a nonrac nonexa database on AWS with a golden gate replication with delayed log apply. That way it will just make sure your data is clean and then you can get the specific corrupted tables created back in your on premise db from that.

On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 1:59 AM Lok P <loknath.73_at_gmail.com> wrote:

> Just curious to understand here, regarding having a second data
> guard setup with delayed log apply:- We have the primary and physical
> standby(with real time log apply) set up on premise. And to minimize the
> storage/maintenance cost and modernization perspective, In this situation,
> Is it advisable to have this additional physical standby(with delayed log
> apply) hosted on a cloud( say e.g. AWS) environment, or will it have any
> downside?
>
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 9:35 AM Lok P <loknath.73_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Thank You So much for the guidance.
>>
>> So it looks like having another data guard setup with a good enough apply
>> lag is the easiest way with minimal overhead as compared to other
>> strategies like compression etc.
>>
>> Also as Mladen pointed out we do have exadata as data guard setup only.
>> So perhaps we currently have a single 10GB ethernet adapter which is why
>> the backup team has put the figure of ~2TB/hr of RTO. And having multiple
>> 10GB adapters we would be able to minimize the RTO even with current DB
>> size. Will check on this with the team.
>>
>> Regarding if we really need Exadata for this application, actually we got
>> ~50% performance improvement across the application jobs post movement
>> Exadata. But yes wil see if just having a large SGA is enough to get the
>> similar performance.
>>
>> Regards
>> Lok
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 5:39 AM Mladen Gogala <gogala.mladen_at_gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/27/22 19:55, Clay Jackson (Clay.Jackson) wrote:
>>>
>>> It would appear that DataGuard has you pretty well covered for “normal”
>>> sorts of disasters and outages, and that your (or your management’s)
>>> concern now is “What happens if my entire system gets corrupted and/or
>>> hijacked, including my DataGuard “backups”?”
>>>
>>> You can also take a backup off the standby database. It will be
>>> recognized as the backup of the primary, provided you're using RMAN catalog.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> --
>>> Mladen Gogala
>>> Database Consultant
>>> Tel: (347) 321-1217https://dbwhisperer.wordpress.com
>>>
>>> -- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>>
>>

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Received on Wed May 11 2022 - 09:42:51 CEST

Original text of this message