Re: raw device or not raw device

From: Nuno Souto <nsouto_at_nsw.bigpond.net.au>
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 12:15:29 +1000
Message-ID: <7i7ov6$4fc$1@m2.c2.telstra-mm.net.au>

Joost Mulders <mail_at_j-mulders.demon.nl> wrote in message news:37474014.863A62CA_at_j-mulders.demon.nl...
> Hi,
>
> We're migrating from an 'old' Siemens Nixdorf (yes,... the also build
> trains and refrigirators) unix Oracle server to a new HP 9000 K machine.
>
> In the old database some tablespaces are stored on a 'raw device'
> without a filesystem. In the new environment, the DBA want raw devices
> (performance) and the unix administrator want's a (journaled) filesystem
> because of it's administrative advantages (backup).
>
> Can anyone recommend for one ore the other ?

Yikes, I can feel a long thread coming up....

FWIW, IMHO, etc:

I'd satisfy both of them. Use raw for the redo log files and jfs for the rest. The redo logs are the ones that need absolute top I/O speed. Raw will still deliver that even on sophisticated UNIX versions. The rest of the database files can survive quite well in jfs as their I/O can almost always suffer a bit and catch up later.

--
Cheers
Nuno Souto
nsouto_at_nsw.bigpond.net.au
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/the_Den Received on Sat May 22 1999 - 21:15:29 CDT