[Ocfs-users] ORA-01207 after SAN maintenance

Matt Daniels Matt.Daniels at priorityhealthcare.com
Thu Nov 25 20:19:29 CST 2004


Hi Jeremy,

Thanks for the response.  I believe GSD was still running when the san maintenance was done.  The database shutdown cleanly, all the issues arose when we tried to start it back up.  We've since found out that a development instance with datafiles on another ocfs partition on the san suffered the exact problem as production, while a development instance with its datafiles on an ext3 partition on the san had no issues at all, and came up cleanly.

This one still has us stumped, we're working with support to try and determine root cause...any other thoughts or suggestions are welcome...

-Matt

-----Original Message-----
From: ocfs-users-bounces at oss.oracle.com
[mailto:ocfs-users-bounces at oss.oracle.com]On Behalf Of Jeremy Schneider
Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 10:33 AM
To: ocfs-users at oss.oracle.com; Matt Daniels
Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] ORA-01207 after SAN maintenance


wow, i'm surprised that cluster manager (oracm) stayed up.  i don't know
all the technical internals of exactly how it works, but i know that it
uses a quorum on shared storage...  i guess it might only use the quorum
for split-brain situations (where the interconnect goes down) but
personally i'd still never yank the shared disk quorum out from under it
without shutting it down!

but i also have to admit that your error message doesn't sound like it
would be related to this.  did you shut down GSD or did you leave that
running too?  the first error (control file older than datafiles)
doesn't make much sense at all...  i think that just means the SCN in
the datafile headers was newer than the SCN recorded in the control
file?  did the DB shutdown cleanly according to the alert log?

(FYI, we're running 9.2.0.5 on a 2-node RHEL3 cluster using ocfs  --
it's a backend for 11.5.9  --  and we've been production for almost 3
months without any problems so far...  oh - and we have [separate] ocfs
partitions for archive logs too)

jeremy, dba


>>> "Matt Daniels" <Matt.Daniels at priorityhealthcare.com> 11/24/2004
9:30:10 AM >>>
We had a situation over the weekend with our production database that
we can't figure out, hoping someone can shed some light.

Specifics:
Oracle 9.2.0.4
OS is Redhat AS2.1
ocfs-2.4.9-e-summit-1.0.12-1
ocfs-tools-1.0.10-1
ocfs-support-1.0.10-1
ocfs-2.4.9-e-enterprise-1.0.12-1

All database, redo, undo, and control files are on ocfs, archived logs
are on ext3.

We shut down the database for san maintenance, but didn't shut down
cluster
manager.  The san was disconnected from the server, a tray was added
and then
the san was reconnected.  The server and cluster manager remained up
during the
maintenance.

When we tried to restart the database, we got an ORA-01207, saying the
control
file was older than the datafiles.  Per Oracle support, we recreated
the control file
and attempted to bring the db up with the new one.  At this point we
received the
following:

Errors in file
/opt/oracle/product/9.2.0/admin/ENTPRD/udump/entprd2_ora_22596.trc:
ORA-00600: internal error code, arguments: [kcoapl_blkchk], [5], [393],
[6101], [], [], [], []

There's a RAC bug entry for [kcoapl_blkchk], but it was for a 4-node
RAC, ours is only
2 nodes, so Oracle internals support said they didn't think it applied
to our case.  We
ended up doing a point-in-time recovery to before the san maintenance,
but moved the
datafiles to an ext3 partition for now.

Has anyone seen this before, or have any input as to what happened? 
We're trying to
determine if this is a bug, and if we should move back to RAC/ocfs.

Thanks very much,
Matt Daniels
Apps DBA, Priority Healthcare Corp

This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual(s) and purpose, and is protected by law.  If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message.  Any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, by anyone other than the intended recipient(s), is strictly prohibited.

<<<<...>>>>
_______________________________________________
Ocfs-users mailing list
Ocfs-users at oss.oracle.com
http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs-users




More information about the Ocfs-users mailing list