Re: Getting the best out of new server hardware: a disk setup for Oracle database

On 2006-06-13, Heikki Siltala <abcwebmasterxyz_at_abcheikkisiltalaxyz.abccomxyz> wrote:
> Mladen Gogala kirjoitti:
>> Well, let me re-iterate then: what do you need ASM for?
>
> + to get better performance: S.A.M.E should provide better performance
> than a failed attempt to distribute IO load evenly over the disks by
> manually relocating the datafiles

        This MIGHT matter if you are already at the point where you are putting 4 or 8 HBAs in each cluster node. Otherwise, you are locking yourself into a new and immature proprietary storage technology for little real benefit.

        Laying out your own SAME scheme is not remarkably difficult. In my own current environment, I wouldn't really get to do anything more with ASM than I'm already currently doing with the array itself.

>
> + to minimize administration tasks: since there is just a huge ASM area
> based on raw devices and no datafiles I simply cannot waste my time in
> playing with datafiles :-)

        The impact of this "problem" is remarkably overblown. Even if you have suddenly been forcibly subjected to a rather unmaintainable legacy environment, it won't be that difficult to get it under control.

>
> + to get best out of the licence fees: since we pay lot of money for
> Oracle licences we are willing to utilize all the features available -
> if not, we could move to MySQL or something! :-)

        Never heard that one before... not even in the most Dilbertesque companies.

-- 
	vi isn't easy to use.				 |||
							/ | \
	vi is easy to REPLACE.

 Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
    ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------        
                http://www.usenet.com