Re: HELP: SQL databases on Network Appliance filers (Oracle and/or Microsoft)

Carl,

My experience has been positive so far. The NFS mounted file system resides on the Network Appliance Filer (NetApp) and not in or on your Unix server. If your running Unix, NFS can be a burden. But since the FSCK happens on the NetApp filer and NOT the Unix server, your performance to access the file system on the NetApp is greatly increased. The NetApp has it's own OS and also runs in Raid4 only.

Some of the products that run on the Netapp (Snap Mirror, Snap Restore, Snap Backup, and snapshots) will make the DBA's job much easier for backup and recovery and second site disaster recovery.

I'm also looking at an LSI Huron Replication Server. It plugs in between my existing A5200 Sun Disk Array and the OS. I can re-route IP traffic from many different servers and it keeps my Oracle database on my second site in state with my production server in Monterey. I'm now setting up bidirectional replication so I can have two production databases in sync with each other and use Oracle TAF, making a preconnect,  which allows my clients to failover to the nearest mirrored site without having to change any listeners or manually do anything.

This server will also sync my file systems if a mirror goes offline and then back online. It can store all IP packets until the link to remore server is established.

This server is VERY new and will be released by LSI Q1. I'm testing it now.

Hope this helps.

David Knollhoff

In article <adc9vscbna1muh416u8cqdbem4vjgvhfq9_at_4ax.com>,   Carl Waldron <carl.waldron_at_nospam.thinklinkinc.com> wrote:
> Yes, opinions on NFS mounted Oracle db's would be useful. How
> reliable has your experience been? Have you noticed any performance
> degradation?
>
> -Carl
>
> On Mon, 23 Oct 2000 20:43:58 GMT, Joe Maloney <jrpm_at_my-deja.com>
> wrote:
>
> >I am not sure what you mean by NetApp filer, but I have 4 instances
> >that are do NFS mounts to a 5th box for selected tablespace files. Is
> >this what you mean?
> >
> >In article <8t1obv$5pb$1_at_nnrp1.deja.com>,
> > Don't Bother <davidknollhoff_at_netscape.net> wrote:
> >> Carl,
> >>
> >> I've been looking into buying a NetApp filer for a second site and
 have
> >> been putting many hours into talking with Oracle users who run it
 in
> >> production.
> >>
> >> I was also asking them the same question about an NFS type
 filesystem.
> >> Everyone said thier seek access improved by using the NetApp filer
> >> since the filesystems reside on the filer and the the OS.
> >>
> >> If you want, I can ask my Netapp Rep to provide you with some
 Oracle
> >> sites running it.
> >>
> >> David Knollhoff
> >>
> >> In article <83t0vs059odvc56e7p5bfoeoirqts0t1hl_at_4ax.com>,
> >> Carl Waldron <carl.waldron_at_nospam.thinklinkinc.com> wrote:
> >> > Hi all,
> >> >
> >> > I am trying to find out if anyone out there is using a Network
> >> > Appliance filer to host their SQL database(s) in a production
> >> > environment. We are looking into this as a solution for our
> >> > Microsoft *and* Oracle databases, but I have serious reservations
> >> > about mounting database files across a network.
> >> >
> >> > Is anyone out there doing this? If so, what are some of the
 issues
> >> > you have experienced? Problems? Success stories? Are you happy
 with
> >> > the combination? Is there any danger of data corruption?
> >> >
> >> > I am also running MSCS (kinda forgot to mention that) which
 makes me
> >> > even more nervous about network-attaching my databases. I have
 read
> >> > the Microsoft Kbase article about Trace Flag 1807...
> >> >
> >> > Please direct all answers to the NG's.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> >
> >> > Carl
> >> >
> >>
> >> --
> >> Cry on someones elses shoulder
> >>
> >> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> >> Before you buy.
> >>
>
>

--
Cry on someones elses shoulder


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.