{ Abhilash Kumar Bhattaram : Follow on LinkedIn }
For a CTO, the challenge with OCI ExaCS / DB Systems patching isn’t the patch itself — it’s the uncertainty around it.
Patching windows collide with business peaks, dependencies hide in old snapshots, and rollback plans depend more on memory than on method. What every CTO needs is not another checklist, but an engineered way to make every patch cycle observable, repeatable, and accountable.
Imagine if one could have a CI/CD style of database patching across your enterprise databases.
In OCI ExaCS/DB System, patching should be predictable — yet most DBAs still brace for long maintenance windows, unplanned rollbacks, and unverified states.
TAB (Total Automation Box) changes that. It automates OCI patch governance, validates each precondition before downtime begins, and maintains live telemetry throughout the patching lifecycle — across compute, storage, and database layers.
1. Ground Zero: Where Challenges Start
Understand where your problems with patching
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1. Ground Zero: Where Challenges Start |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Patching windows vary per VM cluster — no unified calendar. | Solution: TAB aligns ExaCS patch cadence with business maintenance schedules.
| - Manual prechecks miss key OCI dependencies (storage cells, networks). | Solution: TAB performs complete ExaCS health checks pre-patch, including IORM/ASM.
| - Rolling patches on RAC nodes applied manually, increasing downtime risk. | Solution: TAB automates node-wise patch orchestration using OCI APIs.
| - Patch binaries fetched ad-hoc, risking version mismatches. | Solution: TAB validates image and patch metadata against OCI catalog in advance.
| - No real-time patch telemetry; status tracked through CLI logs. | Solution: TAB provides the same logs as OCI cloud native logging
| - Rollback readiness depends on manual snapshots. | Solution: TAB can initiate a full backup of the older databases , however rollbacks are not straight forward
| |
| >> At Ground Zero, patching uncertainty starts with fragmented visibility. |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
2. Underneath Ground Zero: Finding the Real Problem
There are many moving parts with patching which involves the management of teams and the constant application teams inability to support patching windows.
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 2. Underneath Ground Zero: Finding the Real Problem |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - OCI and DBA teams operate on different patch windows. | Solution: TAB synchronizes patch events across tenancy compartments and tags.
| - Lack of environment drift detection between primary and standby clusters. | Solution: TAB keeps a track of DC / DR GI/DU/OS patching
| - Quarterly CPU timelines not aligned with business readiness. | Solution: TAB framework has a patching calendar to assist Cloud / DBA teams in patching
| - Lack of consolidated view of DB System vs Grid Infrastructure patch levels. | Solution: TAB correlates patch metadata across components for unified reporting.
| - Change documentation created manually after patch closure. | Solution: TAB auto-generates several logs with associated OCI work requests
| |
| >> The real issue isn’t patching failure — it’s lack of coordination across layers. |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
3. Working Upwards: From Understanding to Solution
There needs to be a common window where patching can happen for databases especially from a bussiness point of view. Once a window is established it's all about efficiency of execution.
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 3. Working Upwards: From Understanding to Solution |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Treat OCI patching as a managed delivery pipeline, not a weekend job. | Solution: TAB establishes CI/CD-like patching orchestration for ExaCS/DB System fleets.
| - Validate DB System dependencies before downtime triggers. | Solution: TAB integrates API-based readiness verification across storage & grid.
| - Automate post-patch validation and rollback tests. | Solution: TAB runs automated sanity and rollback checks after patch completion.
| - Capture uptime, patch duration, and SLA deviation metrics. | Solution: TAB collects MTTR/patch drift for SLA scorecard tracking.
| - Build OCI-native observability into every patch workflow. | Solution: TAB hooks into OCI Logging/Events for real-time telemetry.
| - Standardize patch procedures across environments (Dev → Prod). | Solution: TAB templates ensure identical patch logic and sequencing.
| - Maintain a patch lineage record — every node, every PSU, every timestamp. | Solution: TAB archives patch metadata into OCI Object Storage for audit trails.
| - Use analytics to refine patch predictability each quarter. | Solution: TAB trend reports highlight downtime trends and improvement areas.
| |
| >> In OCI OCI ExaCS/DB System, true stability isn’t avoiding patches — |
| >> it’s mastering consistency. |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
How Nabhaas helps you
At Nabhaas, we work closely with teams to uncover dependencies, knowledge gaps, and process inefficiencies to ensure the patching cycle is smooth and predictable.
TAB ( Total Automation Box ) is how we automate patching lifecycles. https://www.nabhaas.com/tab
There is no staright answer to the points mentioned above but all of them needs to be addressed as best fits the organization.
At Nabhaas we ensure we identify all the above before beginning a patch cycle. Feel free to download our whitepaper here
Top comments (0)