Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.tools -> Re: RAID 5 or 5 hard disks?

Re: RAID 5 or 5 hard disks?

From: Niall Litchfield <n-litchfield_at_audit-commission.gov.uk>
Date: Sat, 9 Dec 2000 13:27:16 -0000
Message-ID: <90tbvl$jlo$1@soap.pipex.net>

I agree that that is what happens, and that it is wrong. however I'd be interested to know exactly what sort of performance hit one gets from a machine with data & indexes on raid 5, but with well tuned memory structures etc.

regards

--
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
Audit Commission UK
"Barbara Kennedy" <barbken_at_teleport.com> wrote in message
news:aW6Y5.3559$4W.419693_at_nntp1.onemain.com...

> My experience has been that Raid 5 gives you a large performance hit. It
> may be true that if you have enough disks for raid 5 then it is okay. But
> people who tend to use raid 5 (not all) are looking at the bottom line in
> terms of raw cost and not in terms of the cost of poor performance. Thus
> they tend to buy the minimum (e.g. 3 disks) and not more (like 10).
> Jim
>
> "Niall Litchfield" <n-litchfield_at_audit-commission.gov.uk> wrote in message
> news:90qba0$3n$1_at_soap.pipex.net...
> > Hi
> >
> > Raid 5 is fine (so long as you have sufficient disks). However redo and
> > archive logs should always be mirrored. This suggests that you should
have
> > as well as the raid 5 volume at least one mirrored pair for logs and
> > preferably at least 2. You can then put the os on one mirrored pair the
logs
> > on another and the data on your raid5 set.
> >
> > You will always get better performance from striped and mirrored disks
but
> > this tends to be expensive compared to raid5.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Niall Litchfield
> > Oracle DBA
> > Audit Commission UK
> > "Allen" <allenh_at_starbase.neosoft.com> wrote in message
> >
news:BD71F762829CE2EA.D22E5AC688FEA19C.C4951E8FAF1A6749_at_lp.airnews.net...
> > >
> > > I've always installed my databases with indexes on one HD, RBS on
another,
> > > etc.. now I'm in a new environment where they want to use a Raid 5
disk
> > > box that will have all my datafiles in the same volume. Supposedly the
> > > RAID stuff will take care of spreading out the files on different HDs.
> > > Is this cool, or should I still insist on several different HDs within
the
> > > Raid 5 environment?
> > >
> > > thx.. Allen
> >
> >
>
>
Received on Sat Dec 09 2000 - 07:27:16 CST

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US