Re: Oracle-Managed Files - your views

The current database on the Solaris server uses ASM.

The new server will not be using ASM.

Regards.

Peter Hitchman wrote:
> Hi.
> Given that you are using ASM then I see no reason to not use OMF, it
> makes it a lot easier if you just let Oracle do the management. When
> you drop a tablespace, it removes the data files for you. The only
> reason I would not use OMF would in fact be if the system were not
> using ASM, because then to spread the datafiles across disk you have
> to change the location where the database will put them.
>
> Regards
>
> Pete
>
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 5:32 PM, D'Hooge Freek <Freek.DHooge_at_uptime.be
> <mailto:Freek.DHooge_at_uptime.be>> wrote:
>
> Well, I'm using it for several databases at customer sites and I
> must say I like it.
> It makes the administration easier and gives less chance for
> errors. I especially like it for dataguard environments (no more
> *name_convert parameters).
>
> The database files are all placed on a san, so there is also no
> real reason to spread out the datafiles over various filesystems.
>
> As the current environment is using ASM, you are in fact already
> using OMF. So, the only difference in administration would be that
> you can now see your datafiles on the filesystem.
>
>
> regards,
>
> Freek D'Hooge
> Uptime
> Oracle Database Administrator
> email: freek.dhooge_at_uptime.be <mailto:freek.dhooge_at_uptime.be>
> tel +32(0)3 451 23 82
> http://www.uptime.be
> disclaimer: www.uptime.be/disclaimer <http://www.uptime.be/disclaimer>
> ________________________________________
> From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org
> <mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org>
> [oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org
> <mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org>] On Behalf Of Tony Sequeira
> [tony_at_sequeira.org.uk <mailto:tony_at_sequeira.org.uk>]
> Sent: 15 December 2009 17:20
> To: Oracle List
> Subject: Oracle-Managed Files - your views
>
> Hi group,
>
> I have to move a 10g (10.2.0.3) application off a Solaris 10 machine
> (using ASM) to a Windows 2003 server (don't ask).
>
> The required application is only one smallish schema, so I'm going to
> pre-create a database (10.2.0.4) and use export/import.
>
> I'm thinking of using OMF. Does anyone here have any views on
> OMF. My
> research has come up with the following:
>
> Primary advantage seems to be management (no need to specify file
> names/locations...)
>
> The list of disadvantages I have found are all dismissable for this
> particular application.
>
> File System only - I'm OK with that
> Naming Standards - No issue for this database
> Tuning - Again no issue for this database.
>
> Regards.
>
> --
> S. Anthony Sequeira
> ++
> It is bad luck to be superstitious.
> -- Andrew W. Mathis
> ++
>
> --
> http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l--
> http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Regards
>
> Pete

-- 
S. Anthony Sequeira
++
"May your future be limited only by your dreams."
		-- Christa McAuliffe
++


--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l