Re: Should we use Raw partitions or Unix File Systems???

From: Adrian P Challinor <Adrian.Challinor_at_osiris.co.uk>
Date: 1996/12/04
Message-ID: <32a5d0bb.36619466_at_news.demon.co.uk>#1/1


On Mon, 18 Nov 1996 12:55:15 -0500, jmj22026_at_glaxowellcome.com wrote:

>We are getting two new HP servers. These machines are
>supposed to be top of the line. 1GB ram, 64 bit machines,
>storage array with 20 disk, and 2 CPU's. One of our DBA's
>wants to use Raw Partitions. Is any one using this or has
>any one investigated the ups and downs of using RAW vs Unix
>File Systems. Any input would be greatly appreciated. I
>have only heard negative things, but am open to suggestions
>or ideas. Please either post back to news group or send to
>jmj22026_at_glaxowellcome.com Thanks!!
>
>
>John Jones
>Oracle Consultant
>jmj22026_at_glaxowellcome.com

Well, just as everyone says File Systems are better than raw, I'll put the other side of the coin. If you have two machines, you may well want at some time in the future to go to Oracle Parallel Server, and cluster the two machines togther. This only works on Raw partitions.

We use raw partitions all the time on our RS/6000, Sequent and Alpha systems. Its easy on RS/6000, and less so Alpha, and difficult on Sequent. But that, my good friends, is a personal opinion - so don'y flame me, please! I get enough of that from my DBA's!.

Adrian Challinor
Osiris Consultants Ltd Received on Wed Dec 04 1996 - 00:00:00 CET

Original text of this message