Re: S.A.M.E. setup question...

From: Volker Hetzer <volker.hetzer_at_ieee.org>
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 09:34:44 +0200
Message-ID: <dPidnUor0qgPvK_ZnZ2dnUVZ8qCdnZ2d@giganews.com>

Ronald Rood wrote:

> On Mon, 3 Apr 2006 16:05:17 +0200, Volker Hetzer wrote
> (in article <e0ra2t$tc0$1_at_nntp.fujitsu-siemens.com>):
> 

>> We are about to plan our next database server.
>> (Linux RH 3, Oracle 10.2.0.1.0)
>> It's got 6 discs, so it's a pretty small system
>> and we have tentatively decided to go with oracles
>> S.A.M.E. approach, namely as much mirroring as
>> necessary and as much striping as possible. And
>> put the slowest data (probably OS and archived logs)
>> on the inside and the performance critical data
>> on the outside of the discs.

> 
> Volker,
> for the storage I would go for ASM. Have you considered this ? It really is 
> worth taking a good look.

Yes, I did. However, from what I gathered this setup requires a second database instance and I have to keep OS, SW and the ASM separate from the database. This leaves me with four disks instead of six, therefore losing a third of the write performance.

Is there a way on linux to monitor which file gets written now often and with how much data?

Lots of Greetings and Thanks!
Volker Received on Tue Apr 04 2006 - 02:34:44 CDT