Re: To ODA or Not?

There is no "storage pool" when it comes to ASM. ASM groups logical devices into a group. Therefore each ASM disk group has it's own logical devices (which in this case map directly to physical devices).

But, your point is valid. There is no I/O fencing. The only place to get that is with the Exadata/SuperCluster. Your other options is to create separate disk groups for different workloads but you can't do that (not in a way that is supported anyway) on the ODA. However, you can use the database resource manager to limit the I/O that a user or a database can use.

The exception to this rule is the ODA X5-2 which has additional SSDs that can be used for database files or for database flash cache. The devices are in a separate disk group.

Seth Miller

On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 4:26 PM, TJ Kiernan <tkiernan_at_pti-nps.com> wrote:

> The disk groups all use the same underlying storage pool, so long as
> you’re using the hardware in appliance mode (I **THINK**). You can
> reconfigure the hardware and assign physical disks to storage pools, but
> the default is one big mass of disk that ASM diskgroups, volumes, acfs
> mounts, etc spread out across. This is the impression I had from the
> Oracle sales guys I talked about, which made me think twice about
> consolidating OLTP & DW instances onto a single ODA.
>
>
>
> ***usually I wouldn’t be posting with such uncertainty, but given the lack
> of responses on the last thread, I figured it’s worth mentioning for
> followup with someone who knows for sure.
>
>
>
> HTH,
>
> T. J.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Jeff Chirco [mailto:backseatdba_at_gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, March 27, 2015 4:21 PM
> *To:* TJ Kiernan
> *Cc:* oracle-l_at_freelists.org; MARK BRINSMEAD; Seth Miller;
> jack.applewhite_at_austinisd.org
> *Subject:* Re: To ODA or Not?
>
>
>
> I was under the impression that you could carve out separate sections of
> the disk groups to allocate to different areas. Correct me if I am wrong on
> this. However our current SAN is set up like with with just one aggregate.
> So yeah sometimes when I run an massive query in our DW, our other database
> get affected.
>
> Oh and I forgot to mention that when I ran dbms_calibrate_io I got back
> 3400mbps of IO with about 11ms of latency. Not sure what you get on the ODA
> storage.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 2:05 PM, TJ Kiernan <tkiernan_at_pti-nps.com> wrote:
>
> I’ve been glancing at the ODA since version 1, which was our last hardware
> refresh. We ended up rolling our own, but we’ll take a serious look again
> when we outgrow the existing kit. (3 years ago, you could buy a box with
> only 4 cores. I’m not sure if that’s even possible still.)
>
>
>
> The one concern I would add to your current list is I/O. If I recall
> correctly, the storage is one big mass of disk (plus the SSDs for redo).
> If someone kills the I/O channels in your dev environment, can it adversely
> affect any other (such as production) databases running on the ODA?
>
>
>
> Maybe that’s not a concern with your systems, but it’ll mean one ODA for
> our busy database that makes the money plus one at the DR site.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> T. J.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org [mailto:
> oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org] *On Behalf Of *Jeff Chirco
> *Sent:* Friday, March 27, 2015 3:39 PM
> *To:* oracle-l_at_freelists.org; MARK BRINSMEAD; Seth Miller;
> jack.applewhite_at_austinisd.org
> *Subject:* To ODA or Not?
>
>
>
> I had another thread started about the ODA but I wanted to separate it out.
>
> I am currently up for a hardware refresh and tossing around the idea of
> Oracle Database Appliance. But in my environment I am not sure if it just
> that easy.
>
> To start, everything currently runs on Windows 2008 R2 64bit. So that is
> our first big change, going to Linux.
>
> *We have 4 servers:*
>
> - Production 1: Runs 5 EE 11.2.0.4 database's but really 4 of those
> are mostly idle with one acting as our main system. This a 4 CPU box so
> with a .5 multiplier we are licensed for 2 CPU. And currently we are not
> even utilizing half of the CPU and about half of the memory which is 96gb.
> - Test 1: Same server and license as above it just runs all test and
> dev databases
> - Production 2: Runs 3 SE1 11.2.0.4 database for third party
> applications but the communication to Prod 1 for some data. CPU is also
> lightly used on here.
> - Test 2: 1 SE 11.2.0.4 database on here but this server is not that
> important.
>
>
> - 5th server acts as our Data Guard server for just 1 of the database
> running on Prod 1. This is a single CPU server. Meant as a last resort.
>
> *Current Storage*: NetApp SAN, 27tb. The NetApp SAN is nice with ability
> to quickly take a database snapshot/backup (1-2minutes) and then make a
> database clone from that in less than 5 minutes for our 400gb database.
> Plus it has the ability to Snap Mirror all the snapshots to our off site
> location.
>
> If we were to get an ODA since we don't run or have a current need for
> RAC,
>
> 1. One solution would be to have one of the servers for Production and
> other for Test/Dev. I would combine all of our databases into this one
> machine. Then they would all be EE and probably go to 12c and plug able if
> I can get the budget approval for it. But there is another added expense.
> 2. The solution I am thinking makes most sense is turning VM on kind
> of mimicking our current environment so I can keep our third party systems
> separate and on a separate database version if need be. But still all on
> Linux. Then I can create another VM for Enterprise Manager which I
> currently have running on Windows.
>
> But what do I do about our existing snapshot technology with NetApp and
> the mirroring. I believe there is not data mirroring technology with the
> ODA storage. Then are we relying on Data Guard everything or moving backups
> some other way? I heard the ODA has the snap clone technology so we could
> still create dev clones quickly right? Is this an extra cost?
>
> Speaking of Data Guard, since we probably wont be buying two ODA's, we
> will have to stand up our own stand alone Oracle Linux server and support
> that and buy support for it.
>
> Speaking of buying only 1. I dont't think I can get approval for that
> unless they give it to us dirt cheap. This means we have no way to test out
> ODA patches and updates. This sounds scary to me.
>
> Ok so that was a long email. Thank you in advanced for anybody that got
> through it and chimes in and I'm aware that this probably requires a deeper
> discussion.
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

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