Re: SSDs and LUNs

On 2017/10/19 00:49, Ram Raman wrote:

> We are moving one of the systems to vm. The consultants who have been hired to do the implementation are recommending that we create just 2 or 4 'LUNS' for data diskgroup for the db that is 3Tb in size which exhibits hybrid IO. They are promising it is best rather than having 30 or 40 LUNs since the new disks will all be SSDs.They are claiming that it will perform better than having 40 'LUNs'. I still have the 'old way of thinking' when it comes to IO. Can someone confirm one way or other, or point to any paper. thanks.

Curious -- is this by chance a hyperconverged implementation (e.g. Nutanix, Simplivity, etc.)? Or perhaps like someone else suggested, XIV, where there's auto-managed tiered storage (RAM cache, SSD, HDD)?

Rich

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