|
Bala,
I
would be interested in knowing more as well. We are on AIX (recently 5.2)
and using HACMP. We have done very extensive testing, but I have not run
into this issue (not to say that I won't) Do you have standby NICS for
your HSIC? We have performed tests where we fail the primary, and then
allow the standby to take over. This has worked okay under load thus
far.
Regards,
-Ron-
I
would be interested if it's other platforms as well..
we
are embarking on the "golden path of RAC"
Bala,
Do you have a bug# associated with this one? We are on AIX, so this
is *very* interesting to me.
TIA
Raj
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rajendra dot Jamadagni at nospamespn dot
com
All Views expressed in this
email are strictly personal.
QOTD: Any clod can have facts, having an opinion is an art !
We used to experience problems in our RAC environment when there's
an interconnect failure. There's a workaround for that problem, that was
worked for us -
Create a directory under $ORACLE_HOME/rdbms called ".aixopt".
Create (touch) a file called SUSTAIN_IPC_FAILURE (uppercase - 0 byte
file).
We're using 9.2.0.3 2node RAC on AIX 5L / HACMP
4.4
Does Sun or Tru64 have similar workarounds or does it work
flawlessly without the workaound. Having this workaround tells RAC to make
sure atleast there's one surviving instance in the cluster instead of all
instances crashing. Here's the section from alert log file with an
example of handling failures of all 3 interconnects.
Marking down Network with IP 192.168.17.11
Thu Apr 10 23:29:28
2003
Marking down Network with IP 192.168.18.11
Thu Apr 10 23:29:28
2003
Marking down Network with IP 192.168.18.11
Thu Apr 10 23:29:28
2003
Marking down Network with IP 192.168.18.11
Thu Apr 10 23:29:28
2003
Marking down Network with IP 192.168.18.11
Thu Apr 10 23:29:29
2003
Marking down Network with IP 192.168.18.11
Thu Apr 10 23:29:29
2003
Marking down Network with IP 192.168.18.11
Thu Apr 10 23:29:29
2003
Marking down Network with IP 192.168.18.11
Thu Apr 10 23:29:30
2003
Marking down Network with IP 192.168.18.11
Thu Apr 10 23:29:33
2003
Marking down Network with IP 192.168.19.11
WARNING!!! NO COMMON
NETWORKS FOR ALL NODES TO COMMUNICATE
SUSTAINING
IPC FAILURE
THIS SHOULD BE THE ONLY INSTANCE RUNNING IN THIS
CLUSTER
Hrrrmm - well, we've never seen the problem you describe, and
we've got a pretty big RAC environment here (clusters from two to six
nodes, and we combine dev clusters to build bigger ones as we
need). What the situation you describe sounds like is what happens
when there's interconnect failure. Each node thinks independently
that its been separated from the rest of the cluster and (effectively)
shoots itself in the head. This causes every instance to
hang. This is why the crafty RAC Jedi designs well their
interconnect architecture.
But yes, if you're willing to take the
"completely 2n capacity" cluster route and have two databases, double
the oracle licenses, two storage arrays, two fibre channel networks,
etc. , that is the highest availability/reliability cluster you can
have - although at the highest cost and complexity.
Which clustering solution is right for
you? Cheap and inelegant? Expensive and bullet-proof?
Well, that's why we get paid the big bucks, right?
:)
Thanks,
Matt
--
Matthew Zito
GridApp Systems
Email:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cell: 646-220-3551
Phone: 212-358-8211 x
359
http://www.gridapp.com
However, failed transactions must be
handled from client side. Queries may migrate to surviving nodes
transparently.
Also, currently RAC has many problems,
such all nodes hanging when one node dies. Completely separate systems
are still (an will always be) the most available
solution.
Tanel.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003
7:49 PM
Subject: Re: clustering
Another Important
different is that RAC is best High Availability solution in case of
System/Instance Failure where in case of HP or Veritas Cluster, all
of the resource get stopped on live system/node of the cluster and
then get started on second node and hence user will be affected. But
in case of system or Instance failure, there is seamless transition
of the User session in RAC
Indy Johal
|
| "Ron Rogers"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
07/28/03 12:29 PM
Please respond to
ORACLE-L
|
To: Multiple recipients of
list ORACLE-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc:
Subject:
Re:
clustering |
ak,
As I understand it, an HP cluster
is 2 boxes that have the capability
to access the same disks and
data but only one can have the oracle
instance running and
accessing the datafiles(active). Sort of like a
high availability
option.
With RAC both boxes can access the instance and datafiles
at the same
time.
List, Correct me if I need
it.
Ron
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/28/03 12:14PM
>>>
Hi Guys ,
I am new to this clustering concept.
Just trying to understand few
basics . Need ur help .
what
is differece between oracle running on sun /hp cluster with
2
nodes and oracle with RAC running on 2 nodes ?
thanks,
-ak
--
Please see the official
ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
--
Author: Ron
Rogers
INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fat City Network
Services -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com
San
Diego, California -- Mailing list and web
hosting
services
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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).
|
