Was (RAC ASM) is ASM + NAS

>>>I actually really like the NetApp model - its very easy to manage,
very flexible, and the multi-protocol piece works
>>>great for us. We have several hundred systems (mix of real and
virtual) that use netapp as their storage in our
>>>development lab. With Netapp, we can expose the same data via fibre
channel, iSCSI, and NFS, so we can easily
>>>distribute storage resources among the different environments. And
the WAFL model is one that is
>>>tried-and-true, in that its strengths are well-known, its weaknesses
are pretty-well documented at this point (though
>>>they've been mitigated in OnTap 7). Because of that, you can expect
consistent results across different versions of
>>>OnTAP, and different netapp hardware platforms. Compare that with
HP, HDS, EMC, where different families of products
>>>(of course) have vagaries, but there are even fundamental shifts
between revisions within the same family.

...excellent post, Matt. Espousing technology for technical reasons. Now THAT is
something I repsect!

Do you think my sentiment about ASM on NAS (file mode) is off base? I can see how
the ASM->iSCSI model would make a lot more sense.

Thanks for pointing out the NVRAM point.

So, have you ever had, say, a 4 node RAC cluster saturate a filer? What did you
di to mitigate that condition ?

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l