Simpler Navigation for Servers and Operating Systems - Please Update Your Bookmarks
Completed: a much simpler Servers and Operating Systems section of the Community. We combined many of the older boards, so you won't have to click through so many levels to get at the information you need. Check the consolidated boards here as many sub-forums are now single boards.
If you have bookmarked forums or discussion boards in Servers and Operating Systems, we suggest you check and update them as needed.
General
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

DataGuard Physical Stby ARCH Transport over shared DS3 VPN

anon_9
Occasional Visitor

DataGuard Physical Stby ARCH Transport over shared DS3 VPN

Given:
Physical Stby using MAX Performance ARCH transport. Standby database is 500 mi from Primary. We have two, 4T-1 pipes (primary and backup) to the standby site. This size of pipe is currently adequate. Mgmt has proposed replacing backup pipe with a VPN tunnel to our Stby site using existing DS3 connection to the Internet. The primary Network Path would stay the way it is.

Question:
Assuming (!!) we have at least 4 T-1 excess bandwith in our DS3, is there any reason we should NOT do this as a backup route to our Standby?

Regards,

Scott
3 REPLIES
Brian Crabtree
Honored Contributor

Re: DataGuard Physical Stby ARCH Transport over shared DS3 VPN

Scott,

I don't see why you wouldn't use that option. What kind of log generation are you doing currently (logs per hour, log size, etc)? It sounds like either solution would be sufficient most likely.

Brian
Scott Williams_5
Frequent Advisor

Re: DataGuard Physical Stby ARCH Transport over shared DS3 VPN

Brian,

We're switching logs every 2-5 minutes. Log files sizes are 80-100 Mb
Brian Crabtree
Honored Contributor

Re: DataGuard Physical Stby ARCH Transport over shared DS3 VPN

Hmmm. Provided your backup connection is up to speed, the only other concern might be if the VPN is encrypted, and/or if you are carrying confidential financial data across it (oracle logs do carry text data in them). You might want to test the connection to see what your throughput is through the connection.

One other option that you could consider using if it is not is to compress the logs on one side, and decompress them on the other. That can normally cut the logs down to about 25% of the size, on average, depending on the data that is being put into the database.

Brian