> There's no inherent reason why not. RAID-5 _does_ have a performance
> penalty on writes, but if its not the major system bottleneck, why worry?
Besides, putting a write-dedicated battery-backed cache in front of your
RAID5 will probably reduce write contention to acceptable level if there is
any. So if you have cache in front of your RAID5 - dedicate it 100% to writes.
And putting active redo logs to separate storage won't hurt you either as
they are always written and only read once when archived (or never, if
you are in NOARCHIVELOG mode and your instance doesn't crash all too
often) and RAID5 generally doesn't excel at writing a stream of oddly
sized data chunks, which is usual redo log write pattern.
Still, if you don't have obvious I/O bottlenecks in your system - leave it be
and concentrate on tuning your applications.
--
Vladimir Zakharychev (bob@dpsp-yes.com) http://www.dpsp-yes.com
Dynamic PSP(tm) - the first true RAD toolkit for Oracle-based internet applications.
All opinions are mine and do not necessarily go in line with those of my employer.
Received on Wed Sep 18 2002 - 05:30:23 CDT
