Skip to main content

OOW 2009 experience

As I was at the Open World last week, you would expect me to post a bunch of blog entries, right? Well, no... first of all, it was already covered by many others, closer to the real time of the events. You can read about the perhaps most interesting event I attended at Pythian OOW09 Diaries.

Still, let me empahsize one thing - as a first-timer to OOW I realized, that after all, the sessions held there are not so important, after all. Ok, select some of them, but reserve enought time for the Unconference, for the OTN Lounge, and to meet other fellows. You will catch up with the sessions using OOW On-demand (and as I remember, the PDFs are published later for general public) later - you will have to do it anyway, you can't attend everything you would like.

Comments

Vit,

I totally agree with you about getting more time for casual sessions & networking. That was my rookie mistake too. I really enjoyed Unconferences and DEMOgrounds. Hopefully I will plan better next time.

Ittichai

Popular posts from this blog

ORA-27048: skgfifi: file header information is invalid

I was asked to analyze a situation, when an attempt to recover a 11g (standby) database resulted in bunch of "ORA-27048: skgfifi: file header information is invalid" errors. I tried to reproduce the error on my test system, using different versions (EE, SE, 11.1.0.6, 11.1.0.7), but to no avail. Fortunately, I finally got to the failing system: SQL> recover standby database; ORA-00279: change 9614132 generated at 11/27/2009 17:59:06 needed for thread 1 ORA-00289: suggestion : /u01/flash_recovery_area/T1/archivelog/2009_11_27/o1_mf_1_208_%u_.arc ORA-27048: skgfifi: file header information is invalid ORA-27048: skgfifi: file header information is invalid ORA-27048: skgfifi: file header information is invalid ORA-27048: skgfifi: file header information is invalid ORA-27048: skgfifi: file header information is invalid ORA-27048: skgfifi: file header information is invalid ORA-00280: change 9614132 for thread 1 is in sequence #208 Interestingly, nothing interesting is written to

Multitenant and standby: recover from subsetting

In the previous post we learnt how to exclude a PDB (or a datafile) from the standby database recovery. Of course, that might not be the real end goal. We may just want to skip it for now, but have the standby continue to be up-to-date for every other PDB, and eventually include the new PDB as well. Again, standard Oracle pre-12c DBA knowledge is helpful here. These files are just missing datafiles and thus a backup can be used to restore them. The new 12c features add some quirks to this process, but the base is just sound backup and recovery. Backup So let's start with a proper backup: rman target=/ Recovery Manager: Release 12.1.0.2.0 - Production on Mon Nov 16 12:42:38 2015 Copyright (c) 1982, 2014, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. backup database; connected to target database: CDB2 (DBID=600824249) Starting backup at 16-NOV-15 using target database control file instead of recovery catalog allocated channel: ORA_DISK_1 channel ORA_DISK_1: SID=193

Multitenant and standby: subsetting

In the previous post we looked at managing new PDBs added to a standby database, by copying the files to the DR server, as required. However, there is another possible approach, and that is to omit the PDB from the standby configuration altogether. There are two ways of achieving this: 1. Do it the old-school way. A long time before 12c arrived on the scene one could offline a datafile on the standby database to remove it. The same trick is used in TSPITR (tablespace point-in-time recovery), so that you don't need to restore and recover the entire database if you are only after some tablespaces. 2. 12.1.0.2 adds the option to automatically exclude the PDB from standby(s). And 12.2 adds the option to be more specific in case of multiple standbys. For the sake of curiosity I started by setting standby file management to manual again. What I found is that there was very little difference, and the steps to take are exactly the same - it’s just the error message that is slightly