Re: RAID and Redo Logs

Good Point...
Satar Naghshineh

In article <Pine.OSF.3.95.981006141735.1277B-100000_at_gonzo.wolfenet.com>,   Jeremiah Wilton <jeremiah_at_wolfenet.com> wrote:
>
> Another thing that you can do to minimize redologs as a bottleneck is to
> archive from different disks than those to which you are currently writing
> redo.
>
> This is accomplished by having two sets of disks, and alternating redolog
> groups among them. When the database switches into a new log group, the
> archiver starts archiving from the other set of disks, which the database
> just switched off of. This minimizes I/O load on the current redolog
> group.
>
> --
> Jeremiah Wilton http://www.wolfenet.com/~jeremiah
>
> On Tue, 6 Oct 1998 satar_at_my-dejanews.com wrote:
> >
> > Ideal situation for redo log groups is to have two seperate disks on two
> > seperate controllers with one member of the redo log group residing on the
> > first disk while the other member of the redo log group residing on the
> > second disk. This is because the redo log files have a high level of I/O. If
> > you place the redo log groups on a RAID configuration, then you will take a
> > performance hit. For example, RAID5...All writes and reads involve a parity
> > caculation.
> >
> > In article <36170F95.16BD_at_gpu.srv.ualberta.ca>,
> > Brian Yan <by2_at_gpu.srv.ualberta.ca> wrote:
> > > I was told by a DBA that the disk where the redo log resides should not
> > > be configured as RAID. Is it true and why? Thank you in advance!
>
>

--
Oracle DBA/UNIX System Admin
Advanced Enterprise Solutions
(949) 756-0588
Oracle Re-Seller

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own Received on Wed Oct 07 1998 - 12:56:58 CDT