Re: ASM for single-instance 11g db server?
From: Robert Klemme <shortcutter_at_googlemail.com>
Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2011 22:07:42 +0200
Message-ID: <8vumomFpemU1_at_mid.individual.net>
On 04.04.2011 15:10, Mladen Gogala wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Apr 2011 05:32:31 -0700, John Hurley wrote:
>
>> You can "always" still fight thru setting up and using RAW type storage
>> and avoid operating system overhead of file systems on linux if you want
>> to.
>
> You can avoid that overhead with file systems, too. Use direct I/O and
> there you have it. Oracle has filesystemio_options parameter since the
> version 9i.
Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2011 22:07:42 +0200
Message-ID: <8vumomFpemU1_at_mid.individual.net>
On 04.04.2011 15:10, Mladen Gogala wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Apr 2011 05:32:31 -0700, John Hurley wrote:
>
>> You can "always" still fight thru setting up and using RAW type storage
>> and avoid operating system overhead of file systems on linux if you want
>> to.
>
> You can avoid that overhead with file systems, too. Use direct I/O and
> there you have it. Oracle has filesystemio_options parameter since the
> version 9i.
Well, that would get rid of the OS level caching but not the file system overhead (managing inodes, blocks etc.).
http://unixfoo.blogspot.com/2008/01/what-is-direct-io.html
IIRC on Linux you would have to combine direct IO with raw device access to completely avoid OS level caching *and* FS overhead.
Kind regards
robert
-- remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/Received on Mon Apr 04 2011 - 15:07:42 CDT