Re: _ASM_ALLOW_ONLY_RAW_DISKS

From: Kenny Payton <k3nnyp_at_gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 17:08:11 -0400
Message-ID: <CAEidWqPTgmDkiRH90muPMLtEm_yUf10+X-CnZXGy9BORa_gLcg_at_mail.gmail.com>

Thanks. And that was the plan. We use dnfs now in environments but not running ASM.
On Oct 17, 2014 12:34 PM, "Kevin Jernigan" <kevin.jernigan_at_oracle.com> wrote:

> If you're on 11g or higher, you should use Direct NFS (dNFS), not
> standard NFS. It will provide significantly better performance, better load
> balancing if you have multiple NICs, and transparent failover if you have
> multiple NICs and one of the NICs fails...KJ
>
> --
> Kevin Jernigan
> Senior Director Product Management
> Advanced Compression, Hybrid Columnar
> Compression (HCC), Database File System
> (DBFS), SecureFiles, Database Smart Flash
> Cache, Total Recall, Database Resource
> Manager (DBRM), Direct NFS Client (dNFS),
> Continuous Query Notification (CQN),
> Index Organized Tables (IOT), Information
> Lifecycle Management (ILM)+1-650-607-0392 (o)+1-415-710-8828 (m)
>
> On 10/17/14, 5:56 AM, Kenny Payton wrote:
>
> Thanks for your reply, I haven't started any testing yet. Hopefully next
> week I get an opportunity to dig a little deeper.
> On Oct 16, 2014 11:29 PM, "Seth Miller" <sethmiller.sm_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Kenny,
>>
>> I'm a little confused by your post. The
>> parameter _ASM_ALLOW_ONLY_RAW_DISKS is not required for using ASM with
>> files on NFS mounts. The configuration to which you are referring is not
>> only common, but the recommended best practice from the Oracle
>> documentation.
>>
>> Have you started any of your testing yet?
>>
>> Seth Miller
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Kenny Payton <k3nnyp_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Anyone running ASM on file systems? I have a number of databases on
>>> Netapp and some on local storage but none of them are also running ASM.
>>> I’ll be running some tests in the near future where I will be limited to
>>> NFS. I’d like to have some redundancy in my storage layer in addition to
>>> what the NFS solution is using on the back end. I will have access to
>>> multiple separate NFS arrays and was thinking about using ASM redundancy
>>> spanning separate NFS mounts ( from separate arrays ). This is not a
>>> common configuration and I’m not sure how supportable this would be
>>> considering you have to set a hidden parameter to enable ASM to scan
>>> files. I’m curious to hear if anyone is actually using this other than
>>> just to play around on a laptop.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Kenny
>>>
>>> --
>>> http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

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

Received on Fri Oct 17 2014 - 23:08:11 CEST