There is replication for recovery, reporting, and archival purposes. Which is more important you'll need to decide. For recovery purposes: So you have options as to what level to replicate at: 1.) Storage 2.) Database 3.) Application Storage level is generally specialized, expensive, and one or both of performance impacting and/or SAN constrained. I'd love to hear of successful implementations of storage level replication accross distance (states), particularly with RAC. Application level replication requires more administration by the ARS Admin, but also places more control with the ARS Admin. Likewise DB level replication requires more DBA administration, responsibility, and control with the DBA. Frequently, Database Log Shipping is used (SQL Server Replication or Oracle Datagaurd), SQL Server log shipping standbys are open for read access when not receiving logs, while Oracle standbys are generally not open for use (query) at all until manually opened - at which point they can not accept logs. This approach has very low data loss potential during a disaster, but doesn't address the offloading of reporting, or off system archiving. For reporting/archive purposes, application level transfers to another ARS system works well when tickets can be quickly (on close, daily, weekly) moved to the reporting/archive system. This approach has potentially higher data loss potential in a disaster scenario, but better performance for the transactional system in day to day operations.
_______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
