![]() | |
![]() |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
| |||
| |||
|
#2
| |||
| |||
|
|
There are no issues starting Ingres up on the DR Solaris zone from the replicated files. The hostname is different so a few quick changes to config.dat are required as well as changes to files in $II_SYSTEM/files/name. Other than that Ingres is more than happy starting up on the new host. You can bypass these steps by defining the symbol.tbl variable or |
#3
| |||
| |||
|
|
As a DR solution we are trying out SAN to SAN replication. Basically all file systems used by Ingres sit on a SAN. The production server is running Solaris 10. Using SRDF all of the production file systems are replicated to a SAN in another data centre. Attached to the 2nd SAN is server that is running a Solaris 10 zone (only ever powered up in a DR scenario). There are no issues starting Ingres up on the DR Solaris zone from the replicated files. The hostname is different so a few quick changes to config.dat are required as well as changes to files in $II_SYSTEM/files/name. Other than that Ingres is more than happy starting up on the new host. Once Ingres is up and running I see two options. 1 - Trust Ingres and the recovery server to deal with any open transactions and tidy everything up. As long as there are no sinister error messages in the errlog assume all is good. Job done! |
|
2 - Run rollforwarddb for both iidbdb and the application database. Since checkpoints and journal files are replicated Ingres has no issues rolling both databases forward. Being of cautious nature I insisted that option 2 is best as you are far less likely to have any issue with corruption etc... and the only cost is the time it takes to rollforward. Should I place more faith in Ingres to be able to recover without the need for rollforwarddb or is my paranoia justified? |
#4
| |||
| |||
|
#5
| |||
| |||
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |