Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: Is Raid 5 really that bad for Oracle?

Re: Is Raid 5 really that bad for Oracle?

From: Daniel Morgan <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu>
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 20:50:08 -0700
Message-ID: <1091677845.282907@yasure>


Noons wrote:

> Daniel Morgan apparently said,on my timestamp of 4/08/2004 12:22 AM:
>

>>>
>>> Wait until the IT damager decides to go to a NAS
>>> because it's "better value"...
>>
>>
>>
>> The performance difference between SAN and NAS used to be of critical
>> importance. I am not seeing enough difference these days to justify
>> the huge difference in price. Is anyone having a different experience?
>>

>
> Of course there are exceptions. But IME, I've never seen a
> network-based I/O system that can provide the performance
> scalability of a channel I/O system. Don't forget that
> a NAS uses one or more network connections presumably in a
> single card.
> Now I don't care how fast your Ethernet may be, it just by design
> cannot cope with a busy I/O demand. Single-task, single-user
> (the way "scalability is "measured" nowadays...) it may
> show good results. Wait for the first collision...

Actually we use ethernet binding ... so we pretty easily construct a far bigger pipe.

Not fiber I'll grant you but still ... the difference doesn't seem to be large enough to justify the cost.

-- 
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
Received on Wed Aug 04 2004 - 22:50:08 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US