Re: Setting up storage Array for ASM
From: Steve Harville <steve.harville_at_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 16:25:18 -0400
Message-ID: <BANLkTimtebgJBLSNhvXOiD5oPRZ7rx=LQw_at_mail.gmail.com>
You could go raid 5 instead of raid 10 and get more useable disk. There should won't be a write penalty since writes are cached on that hardware. Reads would be faster on raid 5 than on raid 10 because there are more spindles to spread the data (less duplication).
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 16:25:18 -0400
Message-ID: <BANLkTimtebgJBLSNhvXOiD5oPRZ7rx=LQw_at_mail.gmail.com>
You could go raid 5 instead of raid 10 and get more useable disk. There should won't be a write penalty since writes are cached on that hardware. Reads would be faster on raid 5 than on raid 10 because there are more spindles to spread the data (less duplication).
Steve Harville
http://www.linkedin.com/in/steveharville
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Steven Andrew <postora_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks Leyi. We have reserved 2 disks for hotspare already and usable we
> have is 22 disks.
>
> Is the 5 x 1G luns is for placing ocr and voting in high redundancy instead
> of normal one.
>
> To answer Steve, the storage is emc, cx series.
>
> To answer Goran, We are designing this system to handle 1000 to 1500 IOPS.
>
>
>
-- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-lReceived on Wed Apr 20 2011 - 15:25:18 CDT