Re: Striped Filesystems or Individual Disks???

My belief is that as a DBA, I can never replicate the type of striping that the algorithm the hardware striping has. I would highly recommend utilizing a hardware stripe vs a hand stripe. However, if you can split those stripe sets up into to pieces, place each one on it's own conroller, you will be better off that putting the entire thing on one big system. The reasoning here is that the controllers, while fail over, will work better separately than together when accessing index and data files, particularly with multiple users. You can set the controllers up to "see" each other and failover if necessary, but keep them separate. The controllers can be the biggest bottleneck next to the disks themselves.

-Sheilah Scheurich
DBA
to respond via email remove "want no spam at all" from my address

Michael Thompson wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I'm tasked with creating a new. fault-tolerant server for my
> employer, and have the option to go with a large array of
> striped disks for the database files, or to go with individual
> disks. (7 * 4gb each).
>
> There's also the possibility to set up Parallel server, and
> have the whole shooting match replicated to a 2nd identical
> system.
>
> I'm wondering, if I can get RAID5 or Parallel server together,
> such that I'm insulated from individual disk failures, would
> it be to my benefit to lump the entire database into one
> big striped filesystem? I know you normally want to keep your
> data and indexes separate (among other things), but with the
> added performance of striping across multiple disks (and
> perhaps even acress SCSI controllers), does it make sense
> to do this?
>
> I'm thinking that in general, it would be easier to maintain
> the instance in one large filesystem, and that the added
> performance of striping/RAID might offset the benefits of
> keeping your various tablespaces on separate disks.
>
> Any ideas/recommendations/similar setups out there?
>
> Thanks!
> Mike
Received on Thu Dec 18 1997 - 00:00:00 CST