RE: Filesystem Block Size ? 1K or 4K or 8K ?
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 09:36:02 -0400
Message-ID: <21469B88E0EA11498818517F210335310455B702@EPRI17P32001A.csfb.cs-group.com>
One of the reasons that ASM was offered originally was to provide
striping and mirroring to shops that didn't already have a high-end
storage system (such as Symmetrix) in place. If you have
moderately-sized systems and just buy a bunch of disks, using ASM to
manage them is probably a good idea. But if you've already paid big
bucks for Symmetrix, ASM just doesn't give you that much in return for
the additional complexity, learning curve, and risk.
Paul Baumgartel
CREDIT SUISSE
Information Technology
Prime Services Databases Americas
One Madison Avenue
New York, NY 10010
USA
Phone 212.538.1143
paul.baumgartel_at_credit-suisse.com
www.credit-suisse.com
From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org] On Behalf Of Jared Still
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2008 3:48 PM
To: dannorris_at_dannorris.com
Cc: VIVEK_SHARMA_at_infosys.com; 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 <dannorris_at_dannorris.com> 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
Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communications disclaimer:
http://www.credit-suisse.com/legal/en/disclaimer_email_ib.html
-- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-lReceived on Thu Oct 16 2008 - 08:36:02 CDT