RE: oracle 11g dataguard on Netapps

From: Matthew Zito <>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 14:56:25 -0500
Message-ID: <>

I would recommend keeping your binary installs on the local filesystem of your servers - NetApp is expensive storage, and it's useful to keep that install local.

As far as separating volumes, you have to remember that on NetApp, having two separate volumes does not necessarily automatically imply that they are on different physical spindles. On NetApp you have something called an "aggregate", which is basically a RAID group (or multiple raid groups, potentially). Out of this aggregate, volumes are carved up, sharing the same physical spindles. The major advantage of having multiple volumes from the same aggregate is administrative - you can make sure that a bad actor on one volume doesn't fill up the whole filer.

Also, keep in mind that since NetApp uses a copy-on-write filesystem, it can be useful to share a datafile and its index on the same aggregate, as NetApp will make sure those writes are sequential.

For redundancy's sake, if you can spare the disk space, keep at least one set of redo logs, controlfiles, etc. on a separate aggregate. That will help protect you against a multiple disk failure scenario. Also, familiarize yourself with NetApp snapshots, they're very useful.


-----Original Message-----

[] On Behalf Of Joan Hsieh Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 2:49 PM To: oracle_l
Subject: oracle 11g dataguard on Netapps

Hi listers,

Our new project is creating a 11g dataguard environment on NetApps storage. I have the following questions like to ask;

  1. What is the best practice of volume configuration? should we configure single volume for data, single volume for redo?
  2. As oracle home, is it better to install on the local file system or on NetApps? If it is best on Netapps, then should the Oracle home be shared with primary and standby sites? Our primary and standby are on separate servers.



-- Received on Wed Feb 11 2009 - 13:56:25 CST

Original text of this message