Re: Oracle configuration on Enterprise E450

"Sybrand Bakker" <gooiditweg_at_sybrandb.demon.nl> wrote in message news:9c1tuu0m0uqde87443g9cu73hiio84mcqu_at_4ax.com...
> On Wed, 04 Dec 2002 18:16:10 GMT, Darren Dunham
> <ddunham_at_redwood.taos.com> wrote:
>
> >I'm sure there are some arguments against this for performance, and they
> >may make sense, especially for smaller installations. As the systems
> >get bigger, the layout and management issues become larger.
>
>
> The basic arguments against are for stability.
> If you have O/S mirroring, Oracle will send one write request. If your
> write request fails, you're toast and the database likely crashes.
> If you are using s/w mirroring, Oracle will send two write requests.
> The likelihood both write requests fail, provided the two files aren't
> on a single controller, is very low.
>
> I would recommend you work with your DBA to get a better understanding
> of Oracle. I have met many Unix admins 'knowing better' and providing
> unmanageable disk layouts from the Oracle perspective. As fas as I am
> concerned, the disk layout should be determined by the DBA in
> conjunction with the Unix admin, it should not be determined by the
> Unix admin only (which I have seen way too often, even if I did
> provide input beforehand on how I wanted things to be arranged)
>

Hi Sybrand,

I think your point is often the key.

When the O/S admin and the DB admin work together and combine their experiences and points of view, generally the better configuration eventuates (except when the Outsourcing agency then says get stuffed and tells you what you need).

However, how many times have we heard that one or the other dominates in an organisation...

Could be one reason why these roles are often one and the same person ?

Cheers

Richard Received on Thu Dec 05 2002 - 07:54:40 CST