Re: Raid and ORACLE

I agree.

Jim
"Kirt Thomas" <kremovethisspamthingthomas_at_gfsiinc.com> wrote in message news:etkr1tkdrf843vuid4emti2v331cqd5kb2_at_4ax.com...
> wtf? RAID 1, for redo is only expensive, but it effectively protect
> your redo from disk failure (RAID 1 is mirroring) - writes are not
> bad, and an reads can be satisfied from either mirror. Soooo, I don't
> see the big issue with RAID 1, especially since disk is cheap. (you
> should sitll of course do multiple sets - which ends up costing more
> in disk).
>
> OTOH, you get better performance doing RAID 0 (striping) for redo,
> and having multiple redo sets.
>
> But fired, eventually, why?
>
>
> On Thu, 23 Nov 2000 11:55:02 -0600, "Jim DeCicco"
> <decj1_at_interaccess.com> wrote:
>
> >I'd say that using Raid 1 would be closer to the optimal solution than it
 is
> >to the worst solution.
> >
> >Jim
> >
> >"Michael O'Neill" <mjoneill_at_email.com> wrote in message
> >news:T50T5.228778$g6.104795945_at_news2.rdc2.tx.home.com...
> >> "Philippe MARY" <philippe.mary_at_cnfpt.fr> wrote in message
> >> news:lKRS5.764$et7.2248858_at_nnrp3.proxad.net...
> >> > I'd like to know if there are some recommendation when using ORACLE
 with
> >> > RAID.
> >> >
> >> > I think to use RAID 1 for
> >> > Redo log
> >>
> >> Using RAID1 for redo log files should be just enough for you and your
 unix
> >> admin to get fired, eventually.
> >> --
> >> Michael O'Neill
> >> mjoneill_at_email.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
Received on Sat Nov 25 2000 - 09:02:30 CST