Return-Path: Delivered-To: 2-oracle-l@orafaq.com Received: (qmail 32001 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2007 13:09:02 -0600 Received: from freelists-180.iquest.net (HELO turing.freelists.org) (206.53.239.180) by 69.64.49.119 with SMTP; 6 Dec 2007 13:09:02 -0600 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 3AF7C7D471B; Thu, 6 Dec 2007 14:09:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing.freelists.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 25840-02; Thu, 6 Dec 2007 14:09:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id ABC967D464B; Thu, 6 Dec 2007 14:09:01 -0500 (EST) Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list oracle-l); Thu, 06 Dec 2007 13:22:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 3CC977D3DAB for ; Thu, 6 Dec 2007 13:22:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing.freelists.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 15879-07 for ; Thu, 6 Dec 2007 13:22:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail201.messagelabs.com (mail201.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.211]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with SMTP id 992D17D4260 for ; Thu, 6 Dec 2007 13:22:04 -0500 (EST) X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: David.Best@cognos.com X-Msg-Ref: server-3.tower-201.messagelabs.com!1196965299!297611!17 X-StarScan-Version: 5.5.12.14.2; banners=-,-,- X-Originating-IP: [205.210.232.62] Received: (qmail 14237 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2007 18:22:03 -0000 Received: from nomad.cognos.com (HELO sottmailgate.ent.ad.cognos.com) (205.210.232.62) by server-3.tower-201.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 6 Dec 2007 18:22:03 -0000 Received: from sottemail1.ent.ad.cognos.com ([10.69.15.60]) by sottmailgate.ent.ad.cognos.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 6 Dec 2007 13:22:01 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C83834.E4E02686" Subject: RE: Cluster File System Versus ASM for RAC Deployment in Production?... Pros & Cons Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2007 13:22:00 -0500 Message-ID: <2B4E386EAEC90947802323BF373DC0EC0CF4D350@sottemail1.ent.ad.cognos.com> In-Reply-To: <363228.71725.qm@web38208.mail.mud.yahoo.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Cluster File System Versus ASM for RAC Deployment in Production?... Pros & Cons From: "Best, David" To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Dec 2007 18:22:01.0399 (UTC) FILETIME=[E5260C70:01C83834] X-archive-position: 3758 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org Errors-to: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org X-original-sender: David.Best@cognos.com Precedence: normal Reply-to: David.Best@cognos.com List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-Id: oracle-l X-List-ID: oracle-l List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: List-archive: X-list: oracle-l X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at localhost.localdomain ------_=_NextPart_001_01C83834.E4E02686 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 I took the RAC course a couple of months ago as well. The instructor, in between courses, would perform RAC installations as well. He said that with ASM an implementatino would take half as long. ie, before ASM it would take on average 2 weeks and after 1 week. =20 I'm not a big fan of ASM for a number of reasons, but it was nice to hear some real world experiences with it. =20 ________________________________ From: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of kathy duret Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 10:44 AM To: oracle-l@freelists.org Subject: Re: Cluster File System Versus ASM for RAC Deployment in Production?... Pros & Cons I just came from a RAC class and basically the instructor said the same thing. =20 Oracle's direction is ASM, their training is focused on using ASM, their papers are all focused on using ASM. He showed us how to install and configure ASM. He also mentioned Oracle will be coming out next year with another class for just ASM.=20 =20 He also said ASM is alot better in 11i. =20 =20 Yes, Oracle will support the clustered file system but you will get a push back from them to check with the other vendor first to resolve the issue. =20 =20 I just went through this with my Veritas Rman issues. Three years ago, Oracle worked through the issues with me. This last tar they helped me with the basics and then said I would have to contract Veritas to resolve the issue. The will probably be the same for using clustered file system in one-two years from now. Oracle will help you on some of the basic troubleshooting and then you will have to depend on the vendor for help. And as we all know some vendors are better than others for this. =20 My 2.5 cents worth =20 K Dan Norris wrote: Personally, I'd choose ASM and recommend it to all my customers. This is partly because: 1) Oracle recommends it, 2) if Oracle recommends something, they generally support it better than things they don't recommend, 3) it doesn't cost extra money, and 4) I think ASM is a fine product that does its job well (admittedly better in 11g than 10g, but that's not your question).=20 =09 I think that using a CFS requires training for system admins while ASM would also require training, but possibly for the DBAs instead of the sysadmins. Typically, I still see ASM being managed by DBAs even though it really isn't a database. Many companies have the DBAs manage anything with the word Oracle stamped on it. =09 For docs or links, see otn.oracle.com/asm. =09 Dan =09 =09 ----- Original Message ---- From: VIVEK_SHARMA To: "oracle-l@freelists.org" Sent: Wednesday, December 5, 2007 9:08:21 PM Subject: RE: Cluster File System Versus ASM for RAC Deployment in Production?... Pros & Cons=20 =09 =09 Folks =20 Additionally does ASM administration need additional Skill Set / Training versus administration on Cluster File System(CFS), for RAC? If so, in what context?=20 =20 Docs / Links please? =20 Cheers =20 =09 ________________________________ From: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org=20 =09 =09 Folks For subsequent RAC Deployment in ver 10gR2, A Banking customer needs to take a decision on use of Cluster file system versus ASM? =20 Prima-facie, How do the 2 compare in terms of Performance, scalability, availability, migration, ease of use, backups, need for training etc. =20 Any Docs, Links will help. =20 Currently Production Deployment info:- * NON-RAC with Oracle ver 9.2,=20 * Solaris 10.=20 * Database size if 5 TB approx.=20 * Daily peak load of 20,000 Concurrent sessions connecting to the Database via Shared Servers (MTS).=20 * Database exists on the default Unix File system (UFS),=20 * Machine - SF25K SUN Server.=20 * Storage Box - Sun Store Edge 9980 V=20 * Sun Cluster filesystem is QFS=20 **************** CAUTION - Disclaimer ***************** This e-mail contains PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION intended solely for the use of the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by e-mail and delete the original message. Further, you are not to copy, disclose, or distribute this e-mail or its contents to any other person and any such actions are unlawful. This e-mail may contain viruses. Infosys has taken every reasonable precaution to minimize this risk, but is not liable for any damage you may sustain as a result of any virus in this e-mail. You should carry out your own virus checks before opening the e-mail or attachment. Infosys reserves the right to monitor and review the content of all messages sent to or from this e-mail address. Messages sent to or from this e-mail address may be stored on the Infosys e-mail system. ***INFOSYS******** End of Disclaimer ********INFOSYS*** =09 ________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. =20 ------_=_NextPart_001_01C83834.E4E02686 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
I took the RAC course a couple of months ago as = well. =20 The instructor, in between courses, would perform RAC installations as=20 well.   He said that with ASM an implementatino would take = half as=20 long.  ie, before ASM it would take on average 2 weeks and after 1=20 week.
 
I'm not a big fan of ASM for a number of = reasons, but it=20 was nice to hear some real world experiences with it. =20

From: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org=20 [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of kathy=20 duret
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 10:44 AM
To: = oracle-l@freelists.org
Subject: Re: Cluster File System Versus = ASM for=20 RAC Deployment in Production?... Pros & Cons

I just came from a RAC class and basically the instructor said the = same=20 thing.
 
Oracle's direction is ASM, their training is focused on using ASM, = their=20 papers are all focused on using ASM.  He showed us how to install = and=20 configure ASM.  He also mentioned Oracle will be coming out next = year with=20 another class for just ASM. 
 
He also said ASM is alot better in 11i. 
 
Yes, Oracle will support the clustered file system but you will get = a push=20 back from them to check with the other vendor first to resolve the=20 issue.  
 
I just went through this with my Veritas Rman issues.   = Three=20 years ago, Oracle worked through the issues with me.  This last tar = they=20 helped me with the basics and then said I would have to contract Veritas = to=20 resolve the issue.  The will probably be the same for using = clustered file=20 system in one-two years from now.  Oracle will help you on some of = the=20 basic troubleshooting and then you will have to depend on the vendor for = help.  And as we all know some vendors are better than others for=20 this.
 
My 2.5 cents worth
 
K

Dan Norris <dannorris@dannorris.com>=20 wrote:
Personally,=20 I'd choose ASM and recommend it to all my customers. This is partly = because:=20 1) Oracle recommends it, 2) if Oracle recommends something, they = generally=20 support it better than things they don't recommend, 3) it doesn't cost = extra=20 money, and 4) I think ASM is a fine product that does its job well = (admittedly=20 better in 11g than 10g, but that's not your question).

I think = that=20 using a CFS requires training for system admins while ASM would also = require=20 training, but possibly for the DBAs instead of the sysadmins. = Typically, I=20 still see ASM being managed by DBAs even though it really isn't a = database.=20 Many companies have the DBAs manage anything with the word Oracle = stamped on=20 it.

For docs or links, see = otn.oracle.com/asm.

Dan

-----=20 Original Message ----
From: VIVEK_SHARMA=20 <VIVEK_SHARMA@infosys.com>
To: "oracle-l@freelists.org"=20 <oracle-l@freelists.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 5, 2007 = 9:08:21=20 PM
Subject: RE: Cluster File System Versus ASM for RAC Deployment = in=20 Production?... Pros & Cons

Folks
 
Additionally does=20 ASM administration = need=20 additional Skill Set / = Training=20 versus administration on Cluster File System(CFS), for=20 RAC?
If so, in = what=20 context? =
 
Docs=20 / Links please?
 
Cheers
 
From:=20 oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org

Folks
For = subsequent RAC=20 Deployment in ver 10gR2, A Banking customer needs to take = a decision=20 on use of Cluster file system = versus=20 ASM?
 
Prima-facie, How do=20 the 2 compare in terms of Performance,=20 scalability, availability, migration, ease of use, backups, need for = training=20 etc.
 
Any = Docs, Links will=20 help.
 
Currently=20 Production Deployment info:-
  • NON-RAC = with Oracle=20 ver 9.2,
  • Solaris = 10.=20
  • Database size if 5=20 TB approx.
  • Daily = peak load of=20 20,000 Concurrent sessions connecting to the Database via Shared = Servers=20 (MTS).=20
  • Database exists on=20 the default Unix File system (UFS),
  • Machine = - SF25K SUN=20 Server.=20
  • Storage = Box – Sun=20 Store Edge 9980 V=20
  • Sun=20 Cluster filesystem is QFS
**************** = CAUTION -=20 Disclaimer *****************
This e-mail contains PRIVILEGED = AND=20 CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION intended solely for the use of the=20 addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please = notify the=20 sender by e-mail and delete the original message. Further, you = are not=20 to copy, disclose, or distribute this e-mail or its contents to = any=20 other person and any such actions are unlawful. This e-mail may = contain=20 viruses. Infosys has taken every reasonable precaution to = minimize this=20 risk, but is not liable for any damage you may sustain as a = result of=20 any virus in this e-mail. You should carry out your own virus = checks=20 before opening the e-mail or attachment. Infosys reserves the = right to=20 monitor and review the content of all messages sent to or from = this=20 e-mail address. Messages sent to or from this e-mail address may = be=20 stored on the Infosys e-mail system.
***INFOSYS******** End = of=20 Disclaimer=20 = ********INFOSYS***


Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try=20 it now. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C83834.E4E02686-- -- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l