Re: raw device for voting disk RHEL5

On Nov 14, 11:58 am, NetComrade <netcomradeNS..._at_bookexchange.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 09:02:41 -0800, gerryt <lepsys..._at_gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Nov 14, 1:07 am, NetComrade <netcomradeNS..._at_bookexchange.net>
> >wrote:
> >> Posting to the oracle group, b/c all the googling points to only
> >> Oracle folks using raw devices :)
>
> >> This is pretty much the problem, can't write to raw device.
> >> BTW, this is RHEL5, and there is no more 'chkconfig restart
> >> rawservice" or whatever it used to be. Need raw for Std Edition RAC
> >> 10gr2.
> >Or not - see below
> >> [root_at_lsbcmdbp01 ~]# /bin/raw /dev/raw/raw10 /dev/sdi1
> >> /dev/raw/raw10: bound to major 8, minor 129
> >> [root_at_lsbcmdbp01 ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/raw/raw10 bs=512 count=20
> >> dd: opening `/dev/raw/raw10': Device or resource busy
> >> [root_at_lsbcmdbp01 ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdi1 bs=512 count=20
> >> 20+0 records in
> >> 20+0 records out
> >> 10240 bytes (10 kB) copied, 0.00076 seconds, 13.5 MB/s
> >> permissions (played with)
> >> [root_at_lsbcmdbp01 ~]# ls -ltrh /dev/raw/raw10
> >> crw-rw-rw- 1 root root 162, 10 Nov 14 03:31 /dev/raw/raw10
> >> .......
> >> We run Oracle 9iR2,10gR1/2 on RH4/RH3 and Solaris 10 (Sparc)
>
> >Debateable. You DID read the docs about ownership of the slices in
> >question right? On Solaris it is documented that the raw slices should
> >be owned by
> >oracle:oinstall so I assume that's the same for Lie-GN-ux. : >
> You DO see that that i've been running all commands as root?
> I think we figured it out by binding raw to /dev/mapper/mpathX
> devices.

Wow is that what you have to do?
Well, what I saw was:
# ls -ltrh /dev/raw/raw10
crw-rw-rw- 1 root root 162, 10 Nov 14 03:31 /dev/raw/raw10 That indicated to me that "it" was not owned by oracle:oinstall. Maybe its different for PenguinOS, but the "c" also indicates a cooked device vs block O well.

> >FYI I saw no improvement over UFS cooked on Solaris 10 during several
> >swingbench runs, but ASM definitely was better. Consider ASM usage
> >instead??
> We have'nt gotten to ASM yet, need voting and OCR disk, which need to
> be rawhttp://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B19306_01/license.102/b14199/optio...

Hmm truncated on Google
OK - but you dont have to mount everything under ASM either.. : > Received on Wed Nov 14 2007 - 15:40:48 CST