Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid

Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> Re: How many of you use S.A.M.E?

Re: How many of you use S.A.M.E?

From: LS Cheng <>
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 23:29:07 +0100
Message-ID: <>

Not sure about my current customer SAN setup.

But I think ASM is based on SAME! I read Juan Loaiza presentation in the past, certainly he made things look easy but I would say too easy. Not sure if he was talking about ideal world or real world.

On 2/1/07, amonte <> wrote:
> Hi
> Anyone here use Stripe.All.Mirror.Everything methology? The one claimed by
> Mr Loaiza 6 years ago?
> Not long ago I posted to list several I/O problems I have with Storage. I
> was told yesterday that the EMC we have is using Meta Devices, some sort of
> SAME. I was told by the EMC guy that the SAN has 120 disks with RAID 1+0,
> 256GB disks. In the factory it is configured with a internal stripe, 256GB
> disk is divided into slices of 8GB. So we have 120 disks each disk with 32
> slices.
> With that configuration you take slices from several physical disks to
> form LUNs. He syas that this is what they call Mete Devices and usually they
> do that only when the customer is in a hurry and needs the disks badly and
> dont have time to make a better planning. He further said that this sort of
> configuration he has seen response times of over 120ms and it is not
> unusual. The porblem with our disks is that sometimes we get like 80ms
> responsetime and most of time beteen 25 and 60.
> I wonder, is Mete Device a SAME configuration? Sure it is deadly easy to
> configure and maintain but then we are suffering performance problems. The
> EMC box is used by over 10 databases, from OLTP to DWH and some of them
> Hybrid configuration. So the chance that a disk is used by all 10 databases
> is quite easy. Wont the disk head go crazy when 10 databases is asking for
> data in several sectors in the same disk? May the chance of that is quite
> small however I would not be surprised that a disk is being used by 3, 4
> databases concurrently.
> Alex

Received on Thu Feb 01 2007 - 16:29:07 CST

Original text of this message