Jacques,
Your last statement is one place where I will agree on the "superiority" of
SharePlex to Oracle's replication. In my experiences under replication a
transaction will take longer than it should since you have to complete that
transaction on the remote system as well as the local. SharePlex, since it gets
it's queue from the redo logs, would allow the local transaction to complete in
a timely manner while batching the transactions to the remote as a separate
entity.
Dick Goulet
____________________Reply Separator____________________
Author: Jacques Kilchoer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 5/30/2001 10:06 AM
> -----Original Message-----
> From: MacGregor, Ian A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> We are looking into the product as well, but have yet to even
> toy with the product. There is a "no chained rows"
> restriction.
I'm not sure what that statement means. Shareplex will replicate a table
that has chained rows.
> Shareplex does not replicate transactions on
> sys objects. A table dropped on one side will not be
> dropped on the other. It apparently will replicate truncates
> however. It's one thing to read the logs and to find the
> time when a truncate caused writes to the data dictionary,
> but quite another to reconstruct the statement.
Statement from a developer of Shareplex:
<<Interesting statement as this is how we replicate DML. Providing
functionality for DDL is not at all impossible for us. It is just one of
the things on the list of enhancements that we plan for SharePlex, the
priority of which is dependent on the market.>>
Let me relate my personal experience working with Shareplex (BEFORE I was an
employee with Quest Software). At a previous company we were looking for a
replication tool at a company that did payroll taxes. There were large batch
loads (bank records) every night, but especially at the end of each quarter
and at the end of the year. We wanted to ensure that the replication tool we
chose would be fast enough to keep up with the large data loads. When we
tested Oracle Replication and Quest Shareplex, we found that Shareplex was
significantly faster. I personally argued against it initially for some of
the reasons posters here have mentioned (e.g. it uses "unsupported" means to
accomplish its goal) but eventually we implemented Shareplex and were
satisfied with the result. There can be some manual effort involved in
reconciliation of discrepancies but we found that effort to be minor.
Another factor that influenced our decision is that we were intending to use
Shareplex for Oracle in conjunction with Shareplex FS to replicate datafiles
created on the HP-UX server.
------
Jacques R. Kilchoer
(949) 754-8816
Quest Software, Inc.
8001 Irvine Center Drive
Irvine, California 92618
U.S.A.
http://www.quest.com
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2653.12">
<TITLE>RE: Your views on Quest - Shareplex</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>> -----Original Message-----</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> From: MacGregor, Ian A. [<A
HREF="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]";>mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>]</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> We are looking into the product as well, but have yet to
even </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> toy with the product. There is a "no chained
rows" </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> restriction.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>I'm not sure what that statement means. Shareplex will replicate
a table that has chained rows.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>> Shareplex does not replicate transactions on </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> sys objects. A table dropped on one side will
not be </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> dropped on the other. It apparently will replicate
truncates </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> however. It's one thing to read the logs and to find
the </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> time when a truncate caused writes to the data dictionary,
</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> but quite another to reconstruct the statement.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Statement from a developer of Shareplex:</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2><<Interesting statement as this is how we replicate
DML. Providing functionality for DDL is not at all impossible for
us. It is just one of the things on the list of enhancements that we plan
for SharePlex, the priority of which is dependent on the
market.>></FONT></P>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Let me relate my personal experience working with Shareplex
(BEFORE I was an employee with Quest Software). At a previous company we were
looking for a replication tool at a company that did payroll taxes. There were
large batch loads (bank records) every night, but especially at the end of each
quarter and at the end of the year. We wanted to ensure that the replication
tool we chose would be fast enough to keep up with the large data loads. When we
tested Oracle Replication and Quest Shareplex, we found that Shareplex was
significantly faster. I personally argued against it initially for some of the
reasons posters here have mentioned (e.g. it uses "unsupported" means
to accomplish its goal) but eventually we implemented Shareplex and were
satisfied with the result. There can be some manual effort involved in
reconciliation of discrepancies but we found that effort to be minor. Another
factor that influenced our decision is that we were intending to use Shareplex
for Oracle in conjunction with Shareplex FS to replicate datafiles created on
the HP-UX server.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>------</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>Jacques R. Kilchoer</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>(949) 754-8816</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>Quest Software, Inc.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>8001 Irvine Center Drive</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>Irvine, California 92618</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>U.S.A.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2><A HREF="http://www.quest.com";
TARGET="_blank">http://www.quest.com</A></FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
--
Author:
INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fat City Network Services -- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
--------------------------------------------------------------------
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
