Re: Best fs for Oracle RAC

On Sep 25, 1:45 am, DA Morgan <damor..._at_psoug.org> wrote:

> > Well, just to abort the mud-pie contest before it really starts, how
> > about explaining **how** ASM makes migration easier? That is, how it
> > makes turning a Windows database into a Solaris one (say) any easier
> > than it would be in a non-ASM environment...;
>
> Your use of Windows and Solaris confuses the issue. You are asking
> about operating systems and ASM is about storage. And not the
> storage of your Oracle binaries.

No, I don't think it does confuse the issue any further than it is already. That was, in fact, precisely the point!

The original poster wrote, "yes, and i think that ASM could be easy for migration to another platform. "

Define "platform" in that sentence for me please? You seem to think it means "storage architecture". I took it to mean "OS", because that is typically what people mean when they start talking about "migration" and "platforms".

But see... regardless of who has mind-read the OP correctly, instead of just having a go at Bob for his ignorance levels, it pays to be clear on what ALL participants in the thread mean by their choice of terminology.

It's good, anyway, to have you concede that ASM will play no part in easing the transition from Windows to Solaris. Which is (I think) what Bob was getting at.

> Let me ask your question in a manner consistent with what ASM
> is and does.
>
> "... how it makes turning a database stored on an EMC filer into
> one stored on a Hitachi filer"
>
> If you can mount a disk system you can create an ASM diskgroup. If
> you can create an ASM disk group you can migrate from it or to it.

ASM gives you storage independence, obviously. That wasn't (I think) the point about 'easing migration' that was originally being made, however. Received on Mon Sep 24 2007 - 13:21:31 CDT