Re: Windows ASM and DBCA in 10g

"Chris" <christian.antognini_at_trivadis.com> wrote in message news:40e1d6c3$1_at_post.usenet.com...
> **** Post for FREE via your newsreader at post.usenet.com ****
>
>
> > > INSTANCE_NAME
> > > ----------------
> > > +asm
> >
> > Must be "+ASM" not "+asm". I just tested it on my linux laptop.
>
> I was wrong. A colleague just told me that on his Windows installation,
> where the ASM instance is recognized by DBCA, a select on v$instance
returns
> the instance name in lowercase. Notice for the service, spfile, ...
> uppercase is used. As I wrote on my linux installation it is uppercase...
> Anyway, it seams that this check (select on v$instance) doesn't provide
> useful information to find out what's going on.

A further update...

It transpires that the parameter DB_UNIQUE_NAME, which 'normally' defaults to DB_NAME, for ASM instances, defaults to "+ASM". Not that this is any help to me regarding the DBCA issue!

SQL> select instance_name from v$instance;

INSTANCE_NAME

SQL> show parameter db_unique

NAME                                 TYPE        VALUE
------------------------------------ ----------- ------
db_unique_name                       string      +ASM

So in this particular example, I've reverted to choosing my own ASM instance name, but the DB_UNIQUE_NAME has still kicked in as +ASM... and DBCA still insists no ASM instances are running on this machine! Anyway, I imagine that this parameter is, perhaps, why the check of V$INSTANCE is not the final word on the matter.

Regards
HJR Received on Tue Jun 29 2004 - 19:30:16 CDT