Mar 16

Book Review Oracle Database Upgrade and Migration Methods: Including Oracle 12c Release 2

I had the good fortune to review a new Apress book.

Oracle Database Upgrade and Migration Methods: Including Oracle 12c Release 2

I was grateful to be asked to be the Technical Reviewer for this book. I like to think I made some contribution to the content there-in.  🙂  But to be honest, all the hard work was done by the book’s authors, Ravikumar, Krishnakumar and Basha. Compared to writing the books contents, technical reviewing is easy work.

I’ve worked with Oracle databases for over 20 years now. I’ve participated in a large number of discussion forums over the year. More currently, I can be found lurking around on the MOSC and OTN forums under the handle BPeaslandDBA. No matter where I’ve travelled, virtually, all of these spaces have seen more than their fair share of questions related to how to do what I will call “simple” upgrades. Those questions are often found answered in the Oracle Upgrade Guide for that version. I constantly see questions on how to upgrade when a standby is involved, even though that is documented as well. Then I see the harder questions like how to migrate from running Oracle on Solaris to Linux. Or how to upgrade when Multitenant is involved. This book has all the answers in one location. Each migration or upgrade is shown, step-by-step.

If you’re starting your Oracle DBA career, this book can help cover all the upgrade and migration scenarios. If you’re a seasoned DBA but haven’t tackled some of these issues, this book will help you understand your options and then lead you through the process.



Mar 07

GI 12.2 Changes

Oracle was recently released for on-premises deployments and with it comes the new Grid Infrastructure version. There are a few changes worthy of note in this new version.

  • The OUI is now launched with not as we are more familiar with.
  • The GI Management Repository (GIMR) database can now be off-cluster if you do not want to devote disk for it on your current cluster. I’m not sure that I’ll be  using this one but its nice to know its there if I need it.
  • The Cluster Interconnect can now use IPv6 addresses.
  • Reader Nodes – Oracle 12.1 introduced the Flex Cluster with hub nodes and leaf nodes. While the concept sounded good, you could not run RAC instances on leaf nodes. In 12.2, you can now run RAC instances on leaf nodes, but they are read-only. This is a great way to offload reporting capabilities.

With any list of new features comes some deprecated ones. This one stood out to me:

  • OCR and Voting disks must now be on ASM, no more CFS placement. The docs do say that you can still put database files on shared file system storage instead of using ASM, but I expect some day in the future, this will change as well.

When planning for the Oracle installation, I found it curious that the documentation now recommends at least 12GB for the GRID_HOME and that “Oracle recommends that you allocate 100GB to allow additional space for patches”. But the space-hungry demands do not stop there. In Table 8-3, you can see that depending on your configuration, you may need a lot more space than that. I’ll touch on this briefly in my next blog post.

Mar 01

Christmas Comes Early (Oracle 12.2)

Christmas must be coming early! We were previously informed that Oracle 12.2 would be released on March 15, 2017, but you can get it today for Linux and Solaris platforms. Simply go to and download the new version today. No longer is 12.2 “cloud only”.


Sadly, My Oracle Support is not up-to-date with the certification information. When I went to MOS, it has a problem with the 12.2 version. When I try to type “12.2” into the Release box, it tells me “No results for 12.2”.


The one saving grace is that the 12.2 Installation Guide has this information for Linux. Oracle 12.2 is certified for the following Linux platforms:

OL6.4 and OL7

RHEL6.4 and RHEL7


I do not run Oracle on Solaris and no other platforms are currently ready for download.

Feb 23

Oracle RAC on Third-Party Clouds

Yesterday, I came across this white paper from Oracle Corp about Oracle RAC Support on Third-Party Clouds. The paper is definitely a must-read for those who want to run Oracle RAC on AWS, Google or Azure cloud providers. The first paragraph was promising where it stated:

Oracle also maintains an open policy for Third-Party Cloud vendors to support the Oracle Database in their infrastructure.

This sounds great, but the quote is talking about the Oracle Database and not about the RAC option. I found it interesting that the paper spends a great deal of time talking about AWS and Azure but never mentions Google’s cloud.

Here is the bottom line on Oracle’s position for supporting RAC on other cloud offerings:

Oracle RAC is supported on all cloud environments supported by the Oracle Database, as long as the environment is able to provide the hardware, storage, and networking requirements as specified in the Oracle RAC and Grid Infrastructure documentation. With the exception of the Oracle Cloud, Oracle has not tested nor certified Oracle RAC in these environments.

The paper goes to great length to illustrate how AWS muddies the waters with respect to the storage and networking requirements needed to run RAC in AWS.

It should be obvious that Oracle is trying to steer its customers away from running RAC in AWS by reading this paper. Amazon has put out information letting us know how easy it is to run RAC in AWS. But after reading this Oracle white paper, I would have some concern on how well the AWS environment would work for mission-critical RAC deployments.

AWS provides shared storage for RAC by using iSCSI targets on VMs, which I would never use for anything other than a testbed. One issue is redundancy at the storage level. In order to have redundancy at the storage level:


Amazon’s proposed solution is “deploying two or three of these NAS instances and mirroring the storage between them using ASM Normal or High redundancy.” However, should both storage instances fail or be taken down (e.g. for maintenance) at the same time, there will be a complete data loss.


For the private network, AWS does not support multi-casting, a requirement for the Grid Infrastructure Cluster Interconnect. AWS gets around this by using a point-to-point VPN network using n2n ntop. But from ntop’s own website, there is no further development on this in the last two years.

Don’t get me wrong. I think that AWS is a great cloud solution for lots of different things. Admittedly, I have not run RAC on AWS, at least not yet. But if I were looking to move my company’s RAC database infrastructure to the cloud, I would seriously investigate the claims in this Oracle white paper before committing to the AWS solution. That last sentence is the entire point of this blog post.


Jan 27

Free ES for and 12.2 Release Date

The free Extended Support period for Oracle 11.2.04 has been extended for the second time. Oracle will now offer Extended Support for free to its customers with a current maintenance agreement up until Dec 31, 2018. This is almost a full two years away. Those running on Oracle can breath a sigh of relieft that they have more time to get upgraded to 12c.

I will admit I am a bit surprised that Oracle is extending free ES for another time. But maybe it shouldn’t surprise me because now it makes my statements in this Search Oracle article inaccurate.

Today we also learned that Oracle now has a release date for on-premise deployments. Oracle 12cR2 was released in 2016, but as a cloud-first release. This was an incentive from Oracle to drive you to their cloud infrastructure. Those not on the cloud yet have been eagerly awaiting the ability to download the newest version. You will be able to do so on March 15, 2017 for Intel and Solaris platforms. Other platforms will follow later.

For more details, refer to MOS Note 742060.1 and this blog article:

Jan 03

Database Upgrades – Flu Shots or Flu?

The new year is upon us and people are starting to ramp up their IT projects for 2017. Is a database upgrade on  your list of projects? Unless you’re running Oracle across the board in  your data center, it should be!

I was answering some Oracle upgrade questions today when it occurred to me that database upgrades are either a Flu Shot or a Flu decision. I see people all the time that refuse to upgrade their Oracle databases on a regular basis. I still field questions from people running Oracle 10.2, or (shudder) 9i, or (VERY BIG SHUDDER) 8i! Things are working great, database upgrades are a big pain to perform, so they leave it alone. Then the next thing they know, they are lagging very far behind. So what does this have to do with the Flu?

Every year, you can get a flu shot. Sure, you get poked with a needle and experience some pain. You may even have a few minor flu-like symptoms causing you some discomfort. But people put up with the flu shot and all its complications because getting the flu itself is so much worse.

If you upgrade regularly, its like getting a flu shot. At my company, they were running Oracle when I started working here. I upgraded everything to (skipped and then to and then to and then to (skipped Yes, each upgrade had its share of pain points, but they were minor compared to upgrading from 9.2 to Such a big upgrade is like getting the flu. Keeping regular with your database versions is like getting the flu shot.

You should either be running Oracle in  your data center across the board or making plans to do so. Notice I said “in your data center” and that’s because 12.2 is only available in the cloud as I write this. Oracle currently supports and for on-premise deployments. But is currently on free Extended Support and that free period expires in less than 5 months. It can take that long to roll the upgrade through development, into test, and into production, and sort out any issues you have.

So begin upgrade plans today. Work towards getting all Oracle databases running the version in your data center. If you’re upgrading to, then you can only perform a direct upgrade from,, or later, or otherwise direct upgrade is not supported.

Once you get to, look at how your organization can benefit from regular flu shots. If is released,  you can be sure that it will be on my radar to move towards.

Nov 30

verify_queryable_inventory returned ORA-20008: Timed out

I have one system that always receives the same error when I apply the PSU. When the PSU is being applied, the execution of datapatch fails. I get the following on my screen:


Queryable inventory could not determine the current opatch status.

Execute 'select dbms_sqlpatch.verify_queryable_inventory from dual'

and/or check the invocation log


for the complete error.


In the sqlpatch_invocation log file, the following is shown:


verify_queryable_inventory returned ORA-20008: Timed out, Job 
Load_opatch_inventory_1execution time is
more than 120Secs

Queryable inventory could not determine the current opatch status.


Datapatch is trying to ensure that DBMS_QOPATCH is installed correctly. But the check times out. There are a number of reasons for this. It takes some investigation to check system resource utilization to see if there is a bottleneck. One might also need to check database performance while this is being run.


In my case, I know I have a very slow VM. I’m working with our server team to ensure that VM is configured correctly. In the meantime, I can get past the timeout by doing the following:


alter system set events '18219841 trace name context forever';

$ORACLE_HOME/OPatch/datapatch -verbose

alter system set events '18219841 trace name context off';


Setting the event lets datapatch complete successfully.

Nov 28

Oracle Ace Changes

The Oracle Ace Program is changing the way members have to report their activities. Oracle Aces (which I’m using to generically refer to Aces Associates, Aces, and Ace Directors) have long known that they need to keep contributing to the Oracle community at large. Aces regularly have to let the program know of their outreach activities. How we notify the program is changing and with change comes the inevitable complaints that always proceeds any change. I waited until I reported my activities and read a few comments from other Aces before writing this blog post. These opinions are my own and not all Aces may agree with me.

When I first started hearing some of the grumblings, I was a bit concerned. There are some well known Aces that have decided they have had enough with the program. Its never a positive to see good people leave. They don’t like the new method of reporting activities, or they don’t like that they have to produce more content than they are currently able to do in order to generate enough points (more on that in a bit). For those who do not report their activities or do not contribute enough, they will lose the current Ace standing. Some of these Aces say they will still contribute to the community just like they always have, but they do not see a future in the Ace program for themselves. To me, it is a bit bothersome when an individual you know of and personifies “Oracle Ace” no longer wants to be part of the program simply because the reporting requirements have become too much work, and for no other reason.

That being said, the new reporting mechanism has made things much more transparent. In the past, there were loose guidelines as to what was needed to become and stay and Ace. Now, our contributions are given a point value and you need to have a certain number of points to maintain your standing. Write a blog post, and its X points. Give a presentation at a conference, and its Y points. Add them all up and make sure your over the threshold for your Ace level. Transparency is normally a good thing and the new changes have provided just that. My feeling is that this level of transparency is a good thing and will only help the program going forward.

The program has maintained since they announced these changes that the first go-round will be used to potentially adjust the points for certain activities. It looks to me like points do need to be adjusted in a number of categories. For example, to maintain Ace status (Ace and Ace Director), one would need a minimum of 10 presentations at conferences. Getting an abstract accepted is challenging with the level of competition for the few speaking slots available. Even if you could present two papers at a conference,  you’d need to speak at five different conferences over the course of a year. That’s a lot of travelling and a lot of work to present 10 different papers. I’d like to see the points in this category increased. Another one that could use a bump is book authorship. If you wrote one book, you would not maintain your Ace status. Writing a book requires a VERY LARGE commitment! It can take up to a year writing that book and you may not be able to do much else.

One does not have to produce content on one media type. You can do a combination like write blog posts, author a book or chapters in a book, be a technical editor of a book, create a podcast, write articles, present at a conference, and participate in the Oracle Communities. And there are non-content activities as well such as volunteering for a user group, organizing a meetup event, tweeting or being a cloud trial participant.

I think that overall, these changes are good and I do welcome them. But as with any change, there is going to be bumps in the road.

Oct 19

Slash or No Slash?

That is the question.


A recent post on the OTN forums asked about using semicolons and slashes as statement terminators. I dusted off an article I wrote for our development team over 4 years ago on this topic. This article received good reviews and is available on the OTN forums if desired. I thought I would also post it on my blog. Here is the article:


Slash or No Slash

by Brian Peasland

At our company, SQL scripts that are deployed are executed in Oracle’s SQL*Plus command-line utility, whereas many developers use a GUI tool like PL/SQL Developer or SQL Developer. The forward slash means something to SQL*Plus that is not needed in PL/SQL Developer or SQL Developer. As such, it can be confusing to know if you need to include a forward slash in your SQL scripts or not. Hopefully, this section will shed some light on what the forward slash does, when to use it, and when to not use it. Semi-colon Terminator For most SQL statements, the semi-colon is the statement terminator. For example, consider this simple SQL statement run in SQL*Plus:

SQL> select sysdate from dual;




When SQL*Plus sees the semi-colon, it knows the end of the SQL statement has been reached and it can now execute the command.

SQL*Plus Buffer

You may not be aware that SQL*Plus has a buffer for its commands. If I press the ‘l’ key for ‘list’, then I can see the command currently in my session’s buffer.

SQL> l

1* select sysdate from dual

Not surprisingly, there is the command I just executed. I then executed another SQL statement and here is how my buffer now looks:

SQL> l

1 select sysdate,user

2* from dual

As you can see, I now have two lines in my session’s SQL*Plus buffer.

Slash = Execute Buffer

The first rule to understand about the forward slash is that to SQL*Plus, the forward slash means to execute the contents of the buffer. To illustrate this concept, I will execute a SQL statement, wait a few seconds, and then just execute that same SQL statement again but just executing the buffer.

SQL> select to_char(sysdate,’MM/DD/YYYY HH24:MI:SS’) from dual;



06/18/2012 15:20:40

SQL> /


06/18/2012 15:21:17

SQL> /



06/18/2012 15:21:50

You can see that all I did the second and third time was to just type ‘/’ and hit enter and SQL*Plus executed the contents of its command buffer each time.

PL/SQL Blocks

The semi-colon statement terminator worked just fine by itself until Oracle introduced PL/SQL in Oracle version 7. The problem is that PL/SQL blocks can have multiple semi-colons to terminate the individual statements that make up that block. Consider this very simple PL/SQL block that does nothing:

SQL> begin

2 null;

3 null;

4 end;


Lines 2 and 3 contain perfectly valid statements that are each terminated with the semi-colon. And in line 4, we have the END keyword signifying the end of the PL/SQL block. If we were not allowed nested BEGIN/END pairs, then every time SQL*Plus sees “END;” it would know the end of the PL/SQL block has been reached, but we are allowed nested BEGIN/END pairs so the following is perfectly legal and valid:

SQL> begin

2 begin

3 null;

4 end;

5 null;

6 end;


You can tell from the above that just looking for “END;” is not enough because SQL*Plus would have tried to run the block after line 4. So how did Oracle decide to signify the that the PL/SQL block was ready to execute? The answer is by using the forward slash as you may already be aware. The second rule to understand is that all the forward slash is doing when you use it to end a PL/SQL block is to tell SQL*Plus to run what is in the buffer! This has not changed since before PL/SQL was created for Oracle 7. Consider the following sample:

SQL> begin

2 null;

3 end;

4 /

PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.

SQL> l

1 begin
2 null;

3* end;

On line 4, I typed the forward slash to execute the PL/SQL block. You can see that my block successfully completed. If we go back and look at the contents of my command buffer, you can see it contains everything but the forward slash. The forward slash is not part of the command buffer. So now, I’ll run a different PL/SQL block:

SQL> begin

2 dbms_output.put_line(‘Today is ‘||to_char(sysdate,’MM/DD/YYYY HH24:MI:SS’));

3 end;

4 /

Today is 06/18/2012 15:39:32

PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.

The forward slash said to SQL*Plus to run what is in its buffer, and the results are displayed. Now let’s type just the slash again and we should see our PL/SQL block get executed again.

SQL> /

Today is 06/18/2012 15:40:42

PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.

I did not have to type my PL/SQL block anew as it is currently in the command buffer.

PL/SQL and SQL Developer and PL/SQL Blocks

The biggest problem for most developers is that PL/SQL Developer and SQL Developer do not require you to use the forward slash. Why? Because you can hit Execute (F8) or Run Script (F5) to run your PL/SQL block. PL/SQL Developer knows that the moment you hit F8, you are intending to submit the PL/SQL block to be executed. In this case, F8 in PL/SQL Developer is doing the same job as the forward slash in SQL*Plus. Similarly, for F5 in SQL Developer.

The problem at my company is our team deploying code to production does not deploy code with PL/SQL Developer or SQL Developer. They use SQL*Plus because scripting multiple executions is easier with a command line tool. Many developers make the mistake of not including the forward slash for PL/SQL blocks in scripts because they do not need it, but if you want to deploy that code section in a SQL script, the forward slash is required at the end of each PL/SQL block.

When Not To Use Slash

So we’ve seen when and why we use the forward slash, but when is it bad to use it? The third rule to know is that it is bad to use the forward slash following a single SQL statement (not in a PL/SQL block), especially when that slash immediately follows a DML statement (INSERT, UPDATE, or DELETE). If my script contains the following:

select sysdate from dual;


Then I will get “double output” which is not what I normally intend to do in a script. I really only want one line returned, not two as the above script would do:

SQL> select sysdate from dual;



SQL> /




It is even worse when I use the forward slash following a DML statement because that statement will get executed twice. Consider the following script:

insert into test_tab values (10);


We now know that when I execute the two lines above in a script, SQL*Plus will execute it once due to the semi-colon statement terminator and then execute a second time because the forward slash tells SQL*Plus to run what is in the command buffer. When I execute the two-line script above, I get the following output:

SQL> insert into test_tab values (10);

1 row created.



insert into test_tab values (10) *

ERROR at line 1: ORA-00001: unique constraint (PEASLAND.SYS_C00767176) violated

Oops! The first insert worked (1 row created.) but when the forward slash was entered, SQL*Plus tried to insert the same data and I got caught on a unique constraint violation.


Hopefully, this page shows why the forward slash is needed, what is does, and when not to use it. To recap:

  • Include the forward slash at the end of each PL/SQL block
  • Do not include the forward slash after any SQL statements not in a PL/SQL block.
  • The forward slash after a single SQL statement will cause that SQL command to execute twice.

Sep 29

SQL Server Clustering from an Oracle RAC Perspective

Its no secret that I know Oracle’s database clustering solution pretty well. Recently, I completed a SQL Server clustering, high availability solution that took two years from initial design to final implementation. That process involved documenting requirements, determining the options, mapping requirements to implementation details, budgeting, procurement, installation, configuration, and testing.

Now that my project is complete, I thought I would give a few items about SQL Server’s clustering from the perspective of an Oracle RAC guy. We all know that SQL Server and Oracle are both RDBMS engines and they may have some things in common. But they are also completely different creatures too. So if you’re comfortable with Oracle’s Grid Infrastructure and RAC and Data Guard, and are looking at implementing a SQL Server HA solution, maybe this will provide some good information for you.

Our current production system is a 4-node Oracle RAC primary database. This provides high availability (and high performance) within our primary data center. We use Data Guard to transport redo to a 3-node RAC physical standby database. Even though SQL Server <> Oracle, I wanted to keep our configuration as similar as possible to ease administration. So we deployed a 2-node SQL Server Failover Cluster at our primary site and a 1-node “standby” database at our DR site.

Now on to my observations, in no particular order.

  • SQL Server’s HA clustering solution is Active/Passive. Oracle’s is Active/Active which to me is “better”, and yes…that’s a subjective term. For our Active/Passive implementation, I did not like the idea of two physical servers sitting there with one essentially idle all the time. So we have one physical server which is the ‘preferred’ node and one virtual server. If the physical server fails, clustering will automatically failover the SQL Server instance to the virtual server and we’re operational again. This Active/Passive cluster does nothign to address scalability like Oracle RAC does, but it does give me higher availability in our primary environment.
  • Implementing the clustering is super easy. Turn on clustering at the OS level. Because this is an entirely Microsoft stack, they built clustering into the OS. Its already there for you. You just need to turn it on. Then fire up Administrative Tools –> Failover Cluster Manager and wizards walk you through the setup. Its much easier than installing Grid Infrastructure. But Oracle does have to contend with different OS platforms which makes it harder there. It will be interesting to see how SQL Server 2016 on Linux handles Failover Clustering.
  • Oracle uses a Shared Disk model whereas SQL Server is Shared Nothing. But you do need to use “shared disk” in a way because the disk needs to be available on both nodes. However, MS Failover Clustering (MSFC) mounts the clustered disk on the active node. When SQL Server is moved to the other node, either automatically or manually, MSFC will unmount the disk on one node then mount it on the other. Its kinda strange to have a Windows Explorer window open and see the disk either appear or disappear during this transition.
  • Grid Infrastructure uses the Voting Disk for quorum operations. In MSFC, you can have a Quorum disk, use a file share, or configure with no quorum. If you go with the latter, you hamper your automatic failover capability.
  • I’m used to my primary having its own cluster and the standby its own cluster. With SQL Server, the primary nodes and the standby nodes need to be part of the same cluster. Thankfully, the cluster can cross subnets  which is different than Oracle GI. Adding the standby node was super easy, we just removed its voting rights and we did not configure the quorum disk for the standby node. This was fine with us as we want failover to the standby to be a manual operation.
  • For a standby database, you can use Database Mirroring, Log Shipping or AlwaysOn Availability Groups (AGs). The first two are on their way out so I went with the AGs. AGs require the standby node to be part of the same cluster as the primary. There’s a wizard to walk you through setting up the databases to participate in the AG. This is much easier than setting up an Oracle physical standby.
  • For those of you who hate the Oracle documentation, its time to be thankful. Many times during this process I found the MS documentation to be missing very big pieces. For example, I never did find out how to configure my standby node to have no voting rights. Luckily we were able to click our way through it.


When it was all said and done, getting the SQL Server solution implemented was not that tough. Sometimes I had to rely on my knowledge of clustering. Other times, Microsoft’s terminology got in the way. For example, the rest of the world calls it “split brain” but MS calls it “split cluster”. Sometimes getting over the lexicon differences was the biggest hurdle.