Re: Oracle on NT: NTFS or FAT?

Ok, I'm curious. I've always wondered how using RAID would be more advantageous than just using Oracle's archiving and distributed management strategies? And why would you want to layout your tablespaces over lots of filesystems -- just for the i/o? And if so wouldn't you just use partitioning (perhaps that's what you're alluding too)? I can understand laying out the redos, control files, and archives over several disks but I'm not sure about the tablespace item.

Regards,

Ingo Peters
Domingo Informatics

Martin Hepworth <maxsec_at_totalise.co.uk> wrote in message news:<37F4C833.13B754F3_at_totalise.co.uk>...
> Yes it can be faster, but its alot more fun to do backups/restores to.
> Most people run NTFS (for security), make sure the server is configured
> as a network application server (control panel/network/server) so you
> memory doesn't get used as filesystem cache and put the actual Oracle
> stuff on a Hardware raid 5 system for disk redunacy (if you want speed
> of disk I/O then you go for RAID 0+1 and carefully layoout your Oracle
> tablespaces/redos/archivelogs over lots of filesytems.
>
> martin
Received on Mon Oct 04 1999 - 14:15:05 CDT