RE: ASM or not to ASM

From: Martin Bach <>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 17:35:34 +0100
Message-ID: <017a01cc417a$e755b0b0$b6011210$>

Hello all,

I have followed this interesting thread for a while now, there's one point that hasn't been mention IMO when it comes to ASM (which I use everywhere): you cannot mount the same disks on the same box.

Why does this matter? Assume you have a local physical standby on your UAT/TEST array, because no one wants to spend money on inter-SAN replication. If you use this to create clones on the same array to refresh a test environment, the ASM headers will of course be cloned as well. Now since that box the physical standby runs on is already licensed business decided to use the very same box for a test database instance. That isn't easily possible, because the headers of source and clone are identical, and ASM gets really confused. The solution was to put that test database into a virtual machine and thus separate the LUNs.

This probably doesn't apply to many people but it was nevertheless interesting. Before migrating to ASM the database was on OCFS and there was no problem mounting the LUNs on a different mount point.

Martin Bach
Martin Bach Consulting Ltd

> -----Original Message-----
> From: []
> On Behalf Of Nuno Souto


Received on Wed Jul 13 2011 - 11:35:34 CDT

Original text of this message