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: A DBA philosopical question

Re: A DBA philosopical question

From: hpuxrac <johnbhurley_at_sbcglobal.net>
Date: 1 Dec 2005 13:15:52 -0800
Message-ID: <1133471752.424065.138670@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>

jared.hecker_at_gmail.com wrote:
> I am consulting at an all-Windows shop, running mostly 9.2.0.3 -
> 9.2.0.6 under Windows 2003 Server. The one no-no I've encountered so
> far is that their SAN array is all RAID 5. As they have grown by
> acquisition, this is an old, old StorageTek unit that supposedly does
> not support RAID 1,0.
>
> I am looking into I/O constraint issues :-). What I found is pretty
> surprising, and thus generates the "philosophical question". Their
> Oracle servers are configured with one internal drive and two logical
> volumes from the SAN array. The DBA's here rightly multiplexed their
> control files, one on each drive. Looking at the physical disk access
> screens via OEM, I see that the C: drive takes far longer to write. It
> contains control01.ctl. So the question is: Is it better to multiplex
> to two spindles (the faster SAN volumes) to gain the I/O, or is it
> better to multiplex to three drives?
>
> Kind regards,
> jh

If you have a reliable disk storage subsystem and already have multiple copies of a control file, it doesn't appear to make a lot of sense to need/maintain yet another copy on a local drive. Do they use RMAN already? If so then I cannot think of a good reason to keep yet another copy of the control file on hard drive (non-mirrored apparently) that is prone to failure. Received on Thu Dec 01 2005 - 15:15:52 CST

Original text of this message

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