Re: ASM or not to ASM

From: K R <>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 10:05:21 -0700
Message-ID: <>

11g rename asm diskgroup ? something similar

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Martin Bach <>wrote:

> 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: [mailto:
> > On Behalf Of Nuno Souto
> ...
> --

Received on Wed Jul 13 2011 - 12:05:21 CDT

Original text of this message