Environment: 10.1.0.3 RAC on Solaris 5.9, 3-way cluster. Physical standby database on separate server. Using Data Guard Broker.
We're about to add a logical standby database to our production environment to offload reporting. Question is, do we want to feed the logical standby directly from the primary or cascade the redo through the physical standby to the logical standby. I've tested both approaches and haven't encountered any technical gotches. Has anyone implemented a cascaded approach and did you run into any surprises, problems, or undocumented features? It makes sense to me to do a cascaded approach in order to keep the additional redo-shipping load off the primary database. Any reasons not to do that? Things we should consider?
Regards, Mark Strickland Seattle, WA
<span class="gmail_quote"></span>Environment: <a href="http://10.1.0.3">10.1.0 .3</a> RAC on Solaris 5.9, 3-way cluster. Physical standby database on separate server. Using Data Guard Broker.<br> <div> <br> We're about to add a logical standby database to our production environment to offload reporting. Question is, do we want to feed the logical standby directly from the primary or cascade the redo through the physical standby to the logical standby. I've tested both approaches and haven't encountered any technical gotches. Has anyone implemented a cascaded approach and did you run into any surprises, problems, or undocumented features? It makes sense to me to do a cascaded approach in order to keep the additional redo-shipping load off the primary database. Any reasons not to do that? Things we should consider? <br> <br> Regards,<br></div><div><span class="sg"> Mark Strickland<br> Seattle, WA<br> <br>
