Recovery performance of standby databases

From: Chloe C <chloe_at_mcrowdd.plus.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2006 15:29:26 +0000
Message-ID: <pacgn2ho799qe4d0mfhcol52acc4uidl6g@4ax.com>

Does anyone have an idea as to why managed recovery would be significantly quicker than 'ordinary' recovery of a 9.2 standby database? I've really noticed it this week as I try to catch-up a standby database following a 2-week outage from hardware failure.

The SQL statements are:-
Managed:-

ALTER DATABASE

        RECOVER MANAGED STANDBY DATABASE
        DISCONNECT FROM SESSION

Ordinary:-

RECOVER AUTOMATIC STANDBY DATABASE PARALLEL I can't imagine that using ALTER DATABASE and DISCONNECT FROM SESSION would make a lot of difference, and the PARALLEL clause was intended to make things faster.

All I can think of is that normally the log file is scanned prior to the update beng applied and this is done during log shipping for managed recovery - but this is pure guesswork.

Does anyone have any configuration tweaks for improving recovery performance in this sitiuation? There doesn't seem to be a lot of information in the manuals Received on Thu Dec 07 2006 - 09:29:26 CST