Re: ASM for single-instance 11g db server?

"John Hurley" <hurleyjohnb_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message news:874d1a73-420f-4992-a86c-7a37a716623b_at_q36g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
> Mathias:
>
> # Is ASM actually recommended for a single-instance (non-RAC) Oracle
> 11g installation on Linux, when the storage redundancy is managed by a
> SAN?
>
> Sure Oracle is pretty much recommending ASM for everything these days
> right?
>
> We are using it for 11.1 non rac systems. Using EMC for storage
> redundancy ( raid 5 for test/dev raid 10 for prod ) and defining to
> asm the storage as already mirrored ( external redundancy I think is
> how you put it in sql ).
>
> You can also do "double levels" of redundancy by also mirroring in ASM
> while the storage array also does it. I think that is overkill but
> some people would at least think about that.
>
> # Is there a performance benefit when using ASM instead of ext3 or
> even the newer ext4 filesystems?
>
> 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. Using ASM though gives you that same type of
> performance with ( arguably perhaps until you get thru the learning
> curve ) easier/cleaner manageability than RAW storage.

Hello John,

Do you have any idea what the performance benefit would be when you compare ASM with a Linux file system? If it's only like 10%, the additional configuration and maintenance work might not be worth the effort for us.

Thanks,
Matthias Received on Mon Apr 04 2011 - 16:27:48 CDT