RE: ASM - hardware mirroring vs. Oracle mirroring
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 09:58:31 -0400
Where in the documentation do you see Oracle having a bias towards ASM doing mirroring?
I ask cause several Oracle folks I talked to, and an Oracle "best practices" presentation I saw a while ago, all say the same thing. That being, if you already have a well-designed SAN, use external redundancy in ASM, and let the SAN do all the mirroring and striping.
That's where we're at, as well. SAN does all mirroring and striping. ASM just pools the storage and makes it available to the database.
Mark J. Bobak
Senior Database Administrator, System & Product Technologies ProQuest
789 E. Eisenhower, Parkway, P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor MI 48106-1346
+1.734.997.4059 or +1.800.521.0600 x 4059 mark.bobak_at_proquest.com<mailto:mark.bobak_at_il.proquest.com> www.proquest.com<http://www.proquest.com> www.csa.com<http://www.csa.com>
From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org [mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org] On Behalf Of Schauss, Peter
Sent: Friday, April 11, 2008 9:34 AM
Subject: ASM - hardware mirroring vs. Oracle mirroring
I am starting to investigate ASM as a part of a potential 184.108.40.206 to 10g upgrade on Solaris (SunOs 5.9). Oracle's documentation seems to have a bias toward having the ASM instance handle the mirroring while our UNIX support people would prefer to do it at the hardware level. Which is preferable and what factors would push a decision in one direction or the other?
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l Received on Fri Apr 11 2008 - 08:58:31 CDT