Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> RE: Julian Dyke's RAC book

RE: Julian Dyke's RAC book

From: Polarski, Bernard <Bernard.Polarski_at_atosorigin.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 08:25:34 +0100
Message-ID: <25D4919915CCF742A88EE3366D6D913D10AC39BB@mailserver1>

I am curious : why do you want to install a product like OCFS2 if it is only for redo logs, while any NFS vers3 will do as best and is built in most Unixies/linux?

B. Polarski

-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Closson [mailto:kevinc_at_polyserve.com] Sent: maandag 20 november 2006 19:49
To: mgogala_at_verizon.net; gorbyx_at_gmail.com Cc: oracle-l
Subject: RE: Julian Dyke's RAC book

>>>
>>>I read the first 172 pages and I found only one thing I
>>>would do differently. He advocates putting archived logs on
>>>shared storage, but he did not caution against putting redo
>>>logs on OCFS. Problem with OCFS is that it can ONLY do
>>>direct I/O and

When I was doing the technical review of Julian's book I made that point as well. Note, however, that OCFS2 advertises support for general purpose usage so in theory you can put archived redo on OCFS2 and compress them. So, then you have this really nice provisioning model: ASM for Disk Groups, RAW of CSS/OCR, Ext3 for Oracle Home and OCFS2 for archived redo.

What a mess. I blog about this
here:
http://kevinclosson.wordpress.com/2006/10/19/oracle-espouses-tiered-stor age-asm-who/

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




--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Received on Tue Nov 21 2006 - 01:25:34 CST

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US