Re: Sun ZFS vs. Oracle ASM

Vikas Agnihotri wrote:
> Refer to
>
> http://www.sun.com/2004-0914/feature/index.html
>
> This sounds uncannily like the new ASM feature in Oracle 10g?

Not really. Similar, but at a totally diferent level.

> So 10g+ASM on this new ZFS filesystem would be overkill. Either use
ASM
> with raw disks or non-ASM with ZFS?

Not at all. One thing is database transactional integrity, the other is file system data integrity. One is concerned with making sure *database transactions and their data* are integral and safe.

The other is concerned with making sure that when a program (any program!) writes:
*a string of this value*
to a disk, it doesn't read it back as:
* s^*&*g !f(#)(#(v#%^@*

Two completely different things.

> ZFS looks like interesting technology. They seem to have made the
> filesystem fully transactional with almost a 2-phase commit.

Do not confuse file system transactions with application or database transactions.
Also, do not confuse database metadata integrity with file system metadata integrity.
Each has its own requirements and solutions.

> ZFS, Oracle 10g ASM, Veritas suite of products, sheesh...so many
options
> to do essentially the same thing!

Like I said: not the same thing at all.
The space management aspects of it are however very similar. Remains to be seen how efficient all these things are.

> Guess we just need to wait for the inevitable industry benchmarks
> comparing all these?!

Oh yeah. Complete with the usual dose of misinformation from the various vested interests... Received on Thu Jan 20 2005 - 00:57:57 CST