Re: Cluster File System Versus ASM for RAC Deployment in Production?... Pros & Cons

Hi
I have worked on an installation of RAC and ASM for most of the year and our experience has been that RAC is solid, and resilient to failure. We did some nasty tests like pulling a SAN zone to crash the mirror of the ASM and whilst it certainly didn't like it the database remained functional through the entire event. We then reconnected the SAN and was able to fully refresh the mirror after the event with no down time.

We also kept failing individual disksgroups aka slices of SAN on one side of the ASM mirror until it failed entirely and then it was rebuilt just the same as for the rapid failure.

The rebalancing is a bit of a kludge in 10G but it did work.

Yes I would recommend ASM to customers

Cheers

Peter

On Thu, 2007-12-06 at 04:51 -0800, 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).
>
> 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.
>
> For docs or links, see otn.oracle.com/asm.
>
> Dan
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: VIVEK_SHARMA <VIVEK_SHARMA_at_infosys.com>
> To: "oracle-l_at_freelists.org" <oracle-l_at_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
>
>
> Folks
>
>
>
> Additionally does ASM administration need additional Skill Set /
> Training versus administration on Cluster File System(CFS), for RAC?
>
> If so, in what context?
>
>
>
> Docs / Links please?
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
> From:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org
>
>
>
> Folks
>
> For subsequent RAC Deployment in ver 10gR2, A Banking customer needs
> to take a decision on use of Cluster file system versus ASM?
>
>
>
> Prima-facie, How do the 2 compare in terms of Performance,
> scalability, availability, migration, ease of use, backups, need for
> training etc.
>
>
>
> Any Docs, Links will help.
>
>
>
> Currently Production Deployment info:-
>
> * NON-RAC with Oracle ver 9.2,
> * Solaris 10.
> * Database size if 5 TB approx.
> * Daily peak load of 20,000 Concurrent sessions connecting to
> the Database via Shared Servers (MTS).
> * Database exists on the default Unix File system (UFS),
> * Machine - SF25K SUN Server.
> * Storage Box – Sun Store Edge 9980 V
> * Sun Cluster filesystem is QFS
>
> **************** 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***
>
>
>
>

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