Home » RDBMS Server » Server Administration » Automatic Storage Management (ASM) vs Raid 5 (Oracle 10gR2 on Win2003)
Automatic Storage Management (ASM) vs Raid 5 [message #334849] Fri, 18 July 2008 06:17 Go to next message
gmkhaw@yahoo.com
Messages: 14
Registered: September 2006
Location: Malaysia
Junior Member

I am going to install Oracle 10gR2 on IBM raid 5 server with some questions facing:
- Can ASM run on raid 5 configured server? How if possible?
- Will ASM slowdown the database performance?
- ASM recovery mechanism is auto from the mirror or manual?
Re: Automatic Storage Management (ASM) vs Raid 5 [message #334891 is a reply to message #334849] Fri, 18 July 2008 09:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mahesh Rajendran
Messages: 10672
Registered: March 2002
Location: oracleDocoVille
Senior Member
Account Moderator
>> Can ASM run on raid 5 configured server? How if possible?
Yes. Nothing special. Infact ASM and RAID levels are not related.
ASM is just a volume manager. Just choose your
optimum RAID level for your requirement.
For high I/O intensive databases, RAID-5 is not so good.
Do not keep redologs in RAID-5.
>>- Will ASM slowdown the database performance?
If anything is such obvious, why would Oracle recommend this feature?
It depend on how bad you have configured it and some possible internal bugs.
Re: Automatic Storage Management (ASM) vs Raid 5 [message #334963 is a reply to message #334891] Fri, 18 July 2008 21:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
gmkhaw@yahoo.com
Messages: 14
Registered: September 2006
Location: Malaysia
Junior Member

>I plan to install ASM with normal redundancy, but oracle expect/require each disk group to be in separate physical disks. Since RAID 5 can only configure the disk into logical drive and we can not identify the physical disk, will this affect the expected results?
> Why only redo logs can not keep in RAID 5?
> If redo logs can not keep in RAID 5, that means the ASM setting for these files need to be pointed to external disk in RAID 5 environment?
Re: Automatic Storage Management (ASM) vs Raid 5 [message #334964 is a reply to message #334849] Fri, 18 July 2008 22:17 Go to previous messageGo to next message
BlackSwan
Messages: 25037
Registered: January 2009
Location: SoCal
Senior Member
> Why only redo logs can not keep in RAID 5?
It is "can not". It is should not.
Redo logs are VERY write intensive.
With RAID5 volume, when a data block is written, the XOR block must be written to the same volume to provide the redundancy.
This effectively doubles the I/O activity to the volume,
or halves the effective I/O operations to this volume.
RAID5 volumes are good where READ activities dominate.
Re: Automatic Storage Management (ASM) vs Raid 5 [message #334967 is a reply to message #334964] Fri, 18 July 2008 23:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
gmkhaw@yahoo.com
Messages: 14
Registered: September 2006
Location: Malaysia
Junior Member

> If redo logs should not place in RAID 5, what is the recommended setting? Don't use RAID 5?
Re: Automatic Storage Management (ASM) vs Raid 5 [message #334970 is a reply to message #334849] Sat, 19 July 2008 00:15 Go to previous message
BlackSwan
Messages: 25037
Registered: January 2009
Location: SoCal
Senior Member
Better is RAID1, better still is RAID1+0 aka RAID10
or multiplex across individual drives which is equivalent to RAID1.

[Updated on: Sat, 19 July 2008 00:17] by Moderator

Report message to a moderator

Previous Topic: SQL TRACE file generated by imp
Next Topic: Database check
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Mon Dec 05 08:37:57 CST 2016

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.07970 seconds