Re: ASM vs FS backups

From: Adam Musch <ahmusch_at_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 08:20:20 -0600
Message-ID: <516d05a1002240620m1d6bf99bj5b1dfaaea4c22763_at_mail.gmail.com>

I don't know if metalink note 413098.1 (Extremely Poor RMAN Backup Performance to NFS After Upgrade to 10.2) still applies in 11gR2, but it's something to consider. Even if the backups were on a non-clustered file system LUN that was mounted to one node, if you lost that node, it should be pretty easy to swing that disk to the surviving node.

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 5:35 PM, Ram Raman <veeeraman_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all
>
> We are looking into location for putting the backups in a 2 Node RAC
> 11g. Performing the backups to ASM looks easier because if one node goes
> down, backup location is available from the other node. With NFS that will
> be an issue if one node goes down.  On the other hand, backing up to file
> system gives the comfort level of being able to see the files from the OS
> and even copy for cloning to a dev DB or other reasons. It seems the backups
> are going more on the ASM along with the datafiles.
>
> Can the listers give their thoughts.
>
> Thanks.
>

-- 
Adam Musch
ahmusch_at_gmail.com
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

Received on Wed Feb 24 2010 - 08:20:20 CST