Re: compelling arguments for a ThirdParty Cluster

From: Dan Norris <>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 05:55:46 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <>

Some of you have heard of the RAC Pack at Oracle. It's a group within Oracle Development that is focused on all aspects of making RAC better, including working with customers. The manager of that group, Kirk McGowan, has a blog and wrote an entry on the topic of fencing some time ago. It is available at and I'd recommend it highly.


  • Original Message ---- From: LS Cheng <> To: Cc:; Oracle-L <> Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 8:46:36 AM Subject: Re: compelling arguments for a ThirdParty Cluster

simple words

if Oracle Clusterware fencing is not reliable we would have seen already data corruptions issues

plus, RAC internally has algorithm to avoid data corruptions when cache fusion communications suffers problems

interconnect is not SPOF if you protect it with bonding or teaming

I am not sure what is your point about LUNs but I have been in many sites and asking for 5 1GB LUNs does not seem problem at all



LSC On Jan 17, 2008 3:14 PM, hrishy <> wrote:


I am looking it from a prespective off SLA's for ex the document mentions

a)Establishing dependencies between clusterware storage and RAC databases to ensure that the shutdown in the correct
sequence.The sun clusterware allows the
oracle clusterware to be stopped before the filesystems are stopped.

b)It also suggests that there is a scope for oracle clusterware to evict a node and yet not reboot it

immedaitely .The remaning nodes start recovering the transactions however the evicted continues to write to the datafiles during the period of eviction to the point where it falls down to the boot prompt it will

lead to corruption

There are some other points
a)interconnect connect being single point of failure b)How to provision voting disks and OCR should i ask the storage admins to carve out 5 1GB LUNS so i can

mirror them ?
c)Would the storage admin object if i ask 5 1GB luns to be carved out for me as mostly they allocate LUNS of 64 GB 100Gb etc


Sent from Yahoo! Mail - a smarter inbox

-- Received on Sun Jan 20 2008 - 07:55:46 CST

Original text of this message