Re: Opinions on SAME?

Steve Cole wrote:

> If anyone has any firsthand experience implementing this or has a strong
> opinion one way or the other please share.
>
> I agree in principle with most of it - the more physical disk heads you
> can keep working for you the better off you are, and RAID 0+1 is faster
> than RAID5.
>
> I have to question putting the redo logs into that mix though. Redo is
> sequential writes, the other components are random access. I have to
> think that keeping the redo on a separate hardware RAID 1 by itself
> would be faster than putting it on the RAID 0+1 with everything else.
>
> Thoughts?

Hi.

At a presentation sponsored by Veritas in New York, one individual pitched the idea of a hybrid SAME/OFA.
Basically, it was one logical volume (e.g. a 4 drive RAID 10) for online redo logs and a 5 drive RAID 5 volume for archived redo logs - and everything else on the large LVM volume. For high availability, the duplexing of online and archived redo logs would imply separate volumes for the duplexed sets.

Seemed like a good compromise - would like to kick the tires ...

Paul Received on Wed Apr 18 2001 - 12:12:54 CDT