Re: Sun ZFS vs. Oracle ASM

From: bg <bg67_at_austin.rr.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 04:50:30 GMT
Message-ID: <qMGHd.45618$Z%.39328@fe1.texas.rr.com>

Is anybody using ASM care to comment on their experience? Anybody try it on 9i yet? (I'd heard this was possible).

-Robert

"Vikas Agnihotri" <usenet_at_vikas.mailshell.com> wrote in message news:358ombF4iks6aU1_at_individual.net...
> Refer to
>
> http://www.sun.com/2004-0914/feature/index.html
>
> This sounds uncannily like the new ASM feature in Oracle 10g?
>
> So 10g+ASM on this new ZFS filesystem would be overkill. Either use ASM
> with raw disks or non-ASM with ZFS?
>
> ZFS looks like interesting technology. They seem to have made the
> filesystem fully transactional with almost a 2-phase commit.
>
> The ZFS filesystem is also looking like a Oracle autoextend tablespace
> taking/giving back from the storage pool as necessary!
>
> ZFS, Oracle 10g ASM, Veritas suite of products, sheesh...so many options
> to do essentially the same thing!
>
> Guess we just need to wait for the inevitable industry benchmarks
> comparing all these?!
>
> Thanks
Received on Wed Jan 19 2005 - 22:50:30 CST