Re: San & single point of failure

From: ~Jeff~ <jifjif_at_gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 12:22:39 +1300
Message-ID: <363634910811171522u70bee439vc6bb18e883a02519@mail.gmail.com>


we've had SAN failures too ... bad firmware which writes to the wrong disk (?!!!) when a mountpoint is hot added or extended. And this is on brand-name enterprise hardware, with a dedicated storage team ... nothing rinky-dink about it! (well, except the firmware)

So... I agree with the others - try and get the controlfiles on separate SAN disk groups, and local disk if you have it.

regards,
Jeff

2008/11/18 Claudia Zeiler <czeiler_at_ecwise.com>:
> All,
>
> I have just been given a new server to put a database on. It is a SAN
> server, but the apparent layout of drives to me is:
>
> /redo1
>
> /redo2
>
> /big everything_else_disk
>
>
>
> This means that I have just put control_file1, 2, and 3 all in the same
> place on /big. I thought that the whole point of multiple control files
> was to avoid single points of failure, such as a single location.
>
>
>
> I am told that SAN layout is to handle mirroring, striping, & hot spots
> behind the scene and I don't need to worry. If this is true, why do I need
> duplicates of the control file?
>
>
>
> Something smells fishy to me. Does anyone else have an opinion?
>
>
>
> -Claudia

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Received on Mon Nov 17 2008 - 17:22:39 CST

Original text of this message