Re: New architecture using Clusterware

From: Stefano Cislaghi <s.cislaghi_at_gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 15:20:02 +0100
Message-ID: <CAFsgGrzvrib4eKCqpBvH9m2NS6fF146iwfnZ2sAq=U41H9fQJw_at_mail.gmail.com>



Hi Marko,

I am interested. May I ask you why you avoided to use ASM as storage manager? Also, are you using Oracle Linux with fully supported OCFS or Redhat with the OCFS 1.4?
Did you take a proof of concept of your solution before implementation?

thanks
Ste

On 17 January 2013 13:32, Marko Sutic <marko.sutic_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello Dennis,
> we had similar situation as yours with medium-sized databases on Solaris
> servers using VCS.
>
> For new environment we created active/passive failover clusters using
> Oracle Clusterware on Linux with OCFS2 used for shared storage.
> (knocking on wood) We are running clusters now over a year without any
> problems.
>
> Just after initial installation we had some storage problems cause of bad
> drivers and lousy FC cables/ports, but after we fixed that everything works
> without any errors.
> Local disks are used for binaries and database files are on OCFS2 mounts.
> For managing resources we're using custom scripts.
>
> I've heard lots of bad stuff about OCFS2 but I think the most problems
> happen if you use it to store large number of files.
> It is not very flexible system as ASM and maybe it has slightly poorer
> performance then ASM but for us it serves its purpose.
>
> All my doubts were pointed to OCFS2 and I've spent over a month performing
> various stress/load/failover tests.
> OCFS2 successfully survived all of them.
>
>
> Are there better solutions then this, probably, but even on the most
> expensive solutions you could expect bugs and problems.
> Biggest benefit of this solution is cost-effectiveness.
>
> I hope everything will work fine in next years as it worked till now :-)
>
> Regards,
> Marko
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 10:28 PM, Dennis Williams <
> oracledba.williams_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> List,
>> Traditionally we've supported databases with Solaris servers using VCS.
>> These are medium-sized databases with average availability requirements.
>> Nothing leading-edge.
>> We are considering a new cluster of servers. I'm wondering if Linux and
>> Oracle Clusterware (but not RAC) is a cost-effective solution that would
>> provide adequate availability. Has anyone on this list taken that approach?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Dennis Williams
>>
>>
>> --
>> http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *----*
> *Marko Sutic*
> My LinkedIn Profile <http://hr.linkedin.com/in/markosutic>
>
>
> --
> http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
>

-- 
http://www.stefanocislaghi.eu

The SQLServerAgent service depends on the MSSQLServer service, which
has failed due to the following error: The operation completed
successfully.
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Received on Thu Jan 17 2013 - 15:20:02 CET

Original text of this message