DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=iqq8jVKijrHQk98BVa2aMt1MZ1vCIRtBf6maN9oeOOIJbcYz91/7XyJMm2cQOoqZVtf9a34U9GrRjl2KCLmfhTBgj6CsCjzyUlPUClxCr/yOhFVc97YzjebBYr2PO0ApeNh8bslA28VBB8dGP1pqwAFNbSyUcrOAsPzV2GX1+Rc=
Message-ID: <7765c8970709131028x4e9df8bay89e7d05a7b520005@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:28:12 +0100
From: "Niall Litchfield" <niall.litchfield@gmail.com>
To: paul.baumgartel@credit-suisse.com, oracle-l@freelists.org
Subject: Re: ASM IO distribution on a SAN
In-Reply-To: <21469B88E0EA11498818517F21033531596ED5@EPRI17P32001A.csfb.cs-group.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <091320071248.26510.46E931A80001DF8A0000678E2207020953079D9A00000E09A1020E979D@comcast.net>
	 <BAY141-DAV206D8976BB1ED611FACB4A6C30@phx.gbl>
	 <21469B88E0EA11498818517F21033531596ED5@EPRI17P32001A.csfb.cs-group.com>
Sender: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org
Errors-to: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org
Precedence: normal
Reply-to: niall.litchfield@gmail.com

I have quite a lot of sympathy with this - and certainly think SAN
disk should be external redundant groups. SAN however is usually an
expensive corporate strategy and so most dba groups should probably
embrace and extend - at least until the second SAN is bought
establishing the buy storage per application principle (again)

On 13/09/2007, Baumgartel, Paul <paul.baumgartel@credit-suisse.com> wrote:
> I agree.  What many people don't realize is that ASM was meant by Oracle
> to allow small- and medium-size shops, who didn't want to shell out the
> bucks for a storage system like Symmetrix, to realize the benefits of
> striping and mirroring.  Running ASM on top of RAID gives you stripes on
> stripes (or what some people call "plaiding"-ugh).
>
> Having said all that, we run ASM on top of Symmetrix, as it's the
> standard tier one storage.  There are *some* benefits, such as automatic
> rebalancing, but to my mind it's gilding the lily.
>
>
> Paul Baumgartel
> CREDIT SUISSE
> Information Technology
> Securities Processing Databases Americas
> One Madison Avenue
> New York, NY 10010
> USA
> Phone 212.538.1143
> paul.baumgartel@credit-suisse.com
> www.credit-suisse.com
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org
> [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of Michael McMullen
> Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 10:45 AM
> To: ryan_gaffuri@comcast.net; oracle-l@freelists.org
> Subject: Re: ASM IO distribution on a SAN
>
>
> Doesn't this all seem like overkill? It doesn't sound like you are
> getting RAW disks. The san guys would be using some form of raid already
> wouldn't they? They've packaged up the disks, made luns for you, do you
> really want another layer on top to troubleshoot?
> I don't think ASM will increase your performance beyond was a good SAN
> admin could do for you.
>
> Mike
>
> ==============================================================================
> Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic
> communications disclaimer:
>
> http://www.credit-suisse.com/legal/en/disclaimer_email_ib.html
> ==============================================================================
>


-- 
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
http://www.orawin.info
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l