Re: RE: ASM+internal disks

From: Niall Litchfield <niall.litchfield_at_gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 17:45:39 +0100
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=mvtErvvw0BmoZdaoEgwUeptQUWw_at_mail.gmail.com>

Vishal,
I'm struggling to work out how this behaviour affects the design choice in storage layout.

On 26 Apr 2011 17:17, "Vishal Gupta" <vishal_at_vishalgupta.com> wrote:

 On RHEL5, CFQ i/o scheduler is broken. Under heavy load performance improves with deadline i/o scheduler. On RHEL4 it does not give much benefit. There is linux bug for broken CFQ on RHEL5.

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CBYQFjAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugzilla.redhat.com%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D456181&ei=tDaKTcvzNeWG0QHYybzoDQ&usg=AFQjCNEKaFfKVmLhVeoMgJzoaGyeRXS15w
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=2&sqi=2&ved=0CBwQFjAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugzilla.redhat.com%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D427709&ei=tDaKTcvzNeWG0QHYybzoDQ&usg=AFQjCNEZHzLC3u7lkB3nE-1ZNbI7hvboFQ
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=3&sqi=2&ved=0CCIQFjAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugzilla.redhat.com%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D448130&rct=j&q=redhat%20cfq%20bug%20i%2Fo%20slow&ei=tDaKTcvzNeWG0QHYybzoDQ&usg=AFQjCNGdlO8BfKyUeWrifJLtybLszRGsBg

 Regards,
Vishal Gupta
http://www.vishalgupta.com

---

*From:* oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org on behalf of Kevin Closson
*Sent:* Tue 26/04/2011 16:45
*To:* Oracle-L

Subject: Re: ASM+internal disks

Here's how I look at this. The following are true 1) there is no networked storage so all disks are ...

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

Received on Tue Apr 26 2011 - 11:45:39 CDT