From: The Boss <usenet_at_No.Spam.Please.invalid>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 23:52:01 +0100
Message-ID: <4946df90$0$3725$>

Michael Austin wrote:
> hpuxrac wrote:
>> On Dec 13, 9:26 pm, Michael Austin <>
>> wrote:
>>> Can anyone share performance impressions when using ASM with SVC or
>>> even 9i(yeah we know...) cooked file systems?
>>> We currently have the impression that SVC can only return data in
>>> 32k chunks regardless of I/O setting at the OS (Solaris, AIX and
>>> HPUX) and or storage parameters in Oracle causing additional I/O
>>> traffic. Just curious.
>> Back in my old IBM days SVC was a SuperVisor Call ... what are you
>> talking about exactly?
>> Is this some kind of storage? ( We are an EMC shop ... so no clue
>> ).
> ahh yes.. more acronyms...
> SVC=SAN Volume Controller.
> I am just trying to figure it out but have been told you can think of
> it as an array agnostic filer - similar to NetApp, but will work with
> any storage. Essentially this "controller (cluster)" is a gateway
> between your server and your storage whereby you can have any vendors
> arrays behind it and it presents logical LUNS to your server and it
> handles all of the I/O.
> Do a quick google search on IBM SVC architecture.

You also might want to read one or more of IBM's Redbooks on SVC:

You may also be interested in this blog from SVC's Performance Architect:

Received on Mon Dec 15 2008 - 16:52:01 CST

Original text of this message