RE: Filesystem Block Size ? 1K or 4K or 8K ?

From: Mercadante, Thomas F (LABOR) <>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 16:08:21 -0400
Message-ID: <ABB9D76E187C5146AB5683F5A07336FFE093A4@EXCNYSM0A1AJ.nysemail.nyenet>

I'm with you Jared. Until I am shown an absolute good reason for doing this then I am sticking with normal file systems.

[] On Behalf Of Jared Still Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2008 3:48 PM To:
Cc:; Greg Rahn; ORACLE-L Subject: Re: Filesystem Block Size ? 1K or 4K or 8K ?    

On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 6:21 AM, Dan Norris <> wrote:

If you would, please share with us your reasons to avoid ASM. Based on your response, I'm guessing that the reasons might include "because that's the way I've always done it".

Personally, I don't use it as it adds more complexity to our environment.

We (by which I really me 'I') don't need to add any more complexity.

  • Additional instance for ASM
  • file management is simpler
  • storage admins have easy direct access to see what's on disk.

I'm sure there are some rebuttals to this.

Let's hear 'em!

Jared Still
Certifiable Oracle DBA and Part Time Perl Evangelist  

Received on Wed Oct 15 2008 - 15:08:21 CDT

Original text of this message