Re: RAIDs and Oracle Tablespace layout

Thanks for the reply doug. I'll look into the 0+1 setup.

Mike

In article <95v0pv$ct1$1_at_nnrp1.deja.com>,   Doug Coan <dcoan_at_aegonusa.com> wrote:
> In article <95uh7l$tqi$1_at_nnrp1.deja.com>,
> mjgusa_at_my-deja.com wrote:
> > Hello:
> >
> > I am implementing a system that will have a fairly large Oracle 8i
> > database on a SUN system that has a RAID file system on it. I am
> > wondering if, since the files are ultimately on a RAID, this spares
 us
> > from caring about the layout of which tables/indexes go in what
 files
 or
> > not. I am assuming that no matter what file the data/index is on,
 the
> > stream comes from all disks anyway so there is no way to affect
 things
> > either way by putting certain table spaces on certain disks. Does
> > anyone have any experience with this?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mike
> >
> > Sent via Deja.com
> > http://www.deja.com/
> >
>
> ouch ouch ouch :-)
>
> There have been a few spirited debates conducted here concerning RAID
> and disk layout. You could be in for a bit of a mess if you are not
> aware of the pros/cons of different raid configurations and how to lay
> things out. It really depends on the size of your db and just how bad
> the RAID is done.
>
> I have seen bad raid layouts (multiple dbs and servers sharing
 physical
> drives and raid 5) turned into good raid layouts (raid 0+1 with
> dedicated physicals) and the performance improve by 10x or more.
>
> Many of the oracle books I have seen somewhat gloss over raid, but the
> major disk vendors have whitepapers on how to lay out oracle on their
> stuff. I would put the most confidence in some of the discussions
 that
> have been held here however.
>
> Last comment and personal opinion - NEVER EVER EVER put a database on
> raid 5 unless you really really really hate your clients and if you
 are
> the DBA don't mind spending all your time watching disk lights.
>
> Good luck....
>
> --
> Doug Coan
> Oracle Certified Professional DBA
>
> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/
>

Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/ Received on Mon Feb 12 2001 - 01:35:14 CST