Re: physical layout w/ only 2 disks

I don't see much value to another copy of the control file on the same disk. Oh, I guess it is possible for only some tracks to go bad. It shouldn't hurt.

Sweth Chandramouli wrote:

> In article <36E5A376.9B4DED0D_at_deere.com>,
> John P. Higgins <jh33378_at_deere.com> wrote:
> >If you do not duplex the redo log fles on separate devices, then you
> >have a single point of failure.
> >
> >If you do not duplex the control files on separate devices, then you
> >have a single point of failure.
> >
> >If this is a throw-away database, who cares.
> >
> >If anyone depends on this database, then you must care. So, no matter
> >what it does to performance, you must use both drives for both control
> >files and redo log files.
>
> which answers the question about the redo log files. what
> about the issue of the third recommended control file? is there any
> real advantage to having it if it is on a different partition of the
> same device as another control file? and will there be significant
> i/o contention caused by both control files being on one device? it
> has been my understanding that control files don't get that much in
> the way of i/o activity; is this correct?
>
> tia,
> sweth.
>
> --
> Sweth Chandramouli
> IS Coordinator, The George Washington University
> <sweth_at_gwu.edu> / (202) 994 - 8521 (V) / (202) 994 - 0458 (F)
> *
Received on Wed Mar 10 1999 - 13:38:05 CST