The Dutch Prutser's Blog

By: Harald van Breederode

  • Disclaimer

    The views expressed on this blog are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Oracle.
  • Subscribe

  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 260 other followers

A misleading ORA-16047

Posted by Harald van Breederode on February 19, 2009

The problem

Last week I was teaching a Data Guard course and ran a demo how to setup a physical standby database on a Real Application Clusters (RAC) database. Normally all my demos run smoothly but not this time. First I received an ORA-16052 error:

SQL> alter system set log_archive_dest_2
  2  = 'SERVICE=tutor1d_nledu02 LGWR SYNC AFFIRM';
alter system set log_archive_dest_2
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-02097: parameter cannot be modified because specified value is invalid
ORA-16052: DB_UNIQUE_NAME attribute is required 

The error message seemed pretty clear and was quickly corrected:

SQL> alter system set log_archive_dest_2
  2  = 'SERVICE=tutor1d_nledu02 LGWR SYNC AFFIRM db_unique_name=tutor1d_nledu02';

System altered.

Note: Nothing was changed on my demo environment except upgrading from to But that isn’t considered a change is it?

Secondly by the time the standby should receive redo from the primary nothing happened. No matter how often I switched redo logs on the primary, the standby did not receive a single redo log entry. Looking in the alert.log on the standby showed:

Sun Feb 15 16:22:57 2009
Redo Shipping Client Connected as PUBLIC
-- Connected User is Valid
RFS[1]: Assigned to RFS process 25545
RFS[1]: Identified database type as 'physical standby'
Primary database is in MAXIMUM PERFORMANCE mode
RFS LogMiner: Client disabled from further notification

This seems to indicate that the primary database connects successfully to the standby and redo should come in. Looking in the alert.log on the primary however revealed:

Sun Feb 15 16:22:50 2009
ALTER SYSTEM SET log_archive_dest_2='SERVICE=tutor1d_nledu02 LGWR SYNC AFFIRM db_unique_name=tutor1d_nledu02' SCOPE=BOTH;
Sun Feb 15 16:22:53 2009
LGWR: Setting 'active' archival for destination LOG_ARCHIVE_DEST_2
Sun Feb 15 16:22:54 2009
LNSb started with pid=41, OS id=5228 
Errors in file /home/tutor1d/diag/rdbms/tutor1d/tutor1d1/trace/tutor1d1_lgwr_30073.trc:
ORA-16047: DGID mismatch between destination setting and standby
LGWR: Error 16047 creating archivelog file 'tutor1d_nledu02'
LGWR: Failed to archive log 2 thread 1 sequence 35 (16047)
Thread 1 advanced to log sequence 35 (LGWR switch)
  Current log# 2 seq# 35 mem# 0: /sd01/oradata/TUTOR1D/onlinelog/o1_mf_2__bbb38e65.log
Thread 1 cannot allocate new log, sequence 36
Checkpoint not complete
  Current log# 2 seq# 35 mem# 0: /sd01/oradata/TUTOR1D/onlinelog/o1_mf_2__bbb38e65.log
Sun Feb 15 16:23:02 2009
ARC0: Archivelog destination LOG_ARCHIVE_DEST_2 disabled: Data Guard configuration identifier mismatch

Thus the standby tells me that the primary connected successfully whilst the primary tells me it can not connect to the standby due to an ORA-16047 error. Here is the description of an ORA-16047:

$ oerr ora 16047
16047, 00000, "DGID mismatch between destination setting and standby"
// *Cause:  The DB_UNIQUE_NAME specified for the destination does not match
//          the DB_UNIQUE_NAME at the destination.
// *Action: Make sure the DB_UNIQUE_NAME specified in the LOG_ARCHIVE_DEST_n
//          parameter defined for the destination matches the DB_UNIQUE_NAME
//          parameter defined at the destination.

You already saw that I specified tutor1d_nledu02 as the DB_UNIQUE_NAME for LOG_ARCHIVE_DEST_2 and here is the prove that my standby database has indeed the correct DB_UNIQUE_NAME.

SQL> select db_unique_name from v$database;


The solution

As you can imagine I was completely puzzled by this conflicting information and having students awaiting your actions doesn’t give you much time for troubleshooting. So I decided to continue my demo and see what would happen if the Data Guard Broker was given controll over my setup. Much to my surprise redo started to flow once the broker was in charge! My first reaction was “What can the broker do what I can’t?” I did not have time to figure this out during class but I did during the weekend following.

The good news is that I was able to reproduce it but I still could not get redo flowing myself. I re-created my RAC database and suddenly my demo worked fine. The joy was only short because the second time I ran the demo the same problem showed up again. This led to the conclusion that it was probably database parameter related and peeking in the RAC spfile revealed that log_archive_config was configured. I did not set it when I re-created my RAC database nor did I set it in my demo. .It turned out that it was set by the broker and that I did not clean things up after running the demo. Thus all I had to do was setup log_archive_config in my demo to fix it permanently.

SQL> alter system set log_archive_config
  2  = 'dg_config=(tutor1d,tutor1d_nledu02)';

System altered.

Had I paid more attention to the first ORA-16052 error it would have safe me a lot of time, because the error description is pretty clear:

$ oerr ora 16052
16052, 00000, "DB_UNIQUE_NAME attribute is required"
// *Cause:  The DB_UNIQUE_NAME attribute is required when DG_CONFIG is enabled.
// *Action: Use the DB_UNIQUE_NAME attribute to specify a valid Data Guard
//          Name for the destination.  The list of valid DB_UNIQUE_NAMEs can
//          be seen with the V$DATAGUARD_CONFIG view.


Sometimes things are not what they seems! In this case the primary database tried to connect to the standby database to verify its DB_UNIQUE_NAME. But the missing log_archive_config parameter on the standby database prevented the primary from logging in. Resulting in a misleading ORA-16047.

In order to prevent lengthy troubleshooting sessions one should either look error messages up or use the Data Guard Broker ;-)

About these ads

10 Responses to “A misleading ORA-16047”

  1. Paul van Eldijk said

    I’m glad you found the problem, because during class it was indeed puzzeling to see thsi behaviour. And I agree, DG broker is in many cases your friend :)


  2. praveen said

    Your article saved me a lot of confusion and frustration as I was getting the same error!

  3. Hi Harold,

    I got the advice to use this parameter to avoid message “Standby mount ID 0xf5cc6ffe not found ” which was continuously dumped into arc process trace file. And yes, I found your supporting article also.


  4. Arun Kumar said

    Hi Harold,

    I have also the same prob. But i do not have RAC involved in this. Please help me out resolving this.
    Please mail me.. thanks in advance

    Arun Kumar

  5. Aseem said

    Hey Harald,

    Thanks a ton…it worked for me as well :)

  6. Jeroen Rijs said

    Hi Harald,

    Thanks for this great tip! I had a simillar problem when building a standby database. At the standby database, the setting of log_archive_config was blank (default) and it was not blank at the primary site. After changing this setting, the shipment without using the broker, started. The mistake was caused by creating and editing parameter files for primary and standby databases in the wrong order.


    Jeroen Rijs

    • Harald van Breederode said

      Hi Jeroen,

      Thanx for sharing this. I guess this is another reason for using the broker instead of manually managing your Data Guard environment ;-)

  7. Geroge said

    Your article is continuously helping people to resolve such puzzle. You save my time to rebuild the test env.

  8. That is a good tip particularly to those fresh to the blogosphere.
    Short but very precise information… Thanks for sharing this one.
    A must read post!

  9. jgm said

    wow! this solved the same problem I was having!
    Thanks for the post. Somehow the standby did not have the log_archive_config set

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 260 other followers

%d bloggers like this: