Re: performance problems after increasing redolog size

From: Andrew Allen <andrew.allen_at_sppaammkiller.handleman.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 16:30:55 GMT
Message-ID: <3E661937.6020307@sppaammkiller.handleman.com>

Bud Socks wrote:

>>You should have 8. I hope you have multiplexed.

>
> No - they are not multiplexed, just 4 members (Redo01.log - Redo04.log)
> I think it does not make sense on a raid level 5 (thats the only raid level
> available
> on that server) - am i right ?

NO! You can still get file system corruption. Duplex your redo and also duplex the archived. And do it on different file systems. Raid only provides a degree of protection against disk failure but does nothing to protect you against file system corruption or screw-ups that delete a redo file.

Besides, what will you do if two disks on one set fail? I have seen disks fail within hours of each other -- seems they had (nearly) sequential serial numbers so they came from the same batch.

>
> A server consolidation will be accomplished within the next 3 month. On the
> new platform i will follow the Oracle file distribution as recommended but
> now
> i have to deal with that situation and as you can imagine i am not very
> exited.

--
AjA

Received on Wed Mar 05 2003 - 10:30:55 CST