Re: 9i RAC : OCFS vs Raw Devices

thanks for the reply :)

I'm not going to be able to wait for v2.0. ... anyway, i've got only 2 nodes on my cluster. deploying/managing software on both going smoothly. Sure that more than 2 nodes would be time consuming. My problem being the number of raw devices to create ... a real nightmare. ocfs v1.0.9 seems to fit my needs. but i'm not sure if it is prodution stable ...

Majd

"Sten Rognes" <FatDBA_at_morespam.com> a écrit dans le message de news: Aaqeb.10629$NX3.9099_at_newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> One of the drawbacks with OCFS as I experience it, is that you can't host
> the OH on the clustered file system. Software maintenance/patching can be
a
> nightmare if managing a larger number of nodes/instances. Don't know what
> your timeframe is, but it might be worth looking out for OCFS ver.2.0
which
> is just around the corner. Ver.2.0 supports hosting both OH and archive
log
> destinations on the clustered file system.
>
> If you are willing to look at alternatives to OCFS, I've been quite
> impressed with Polyserver Matrix Server. It's a more mature product than
> OCFS and provides a true symmetric cluster file system.
>
> Sten
>
>
>
> "Majd" <autres_at_free.fr> wrote in message
> news:3f79db9e$0$20156$626a54ce_at_news.free.fr...
> > I have to set up a 2 nodes Oracle 9i cluster, with RedHat AS 2.1.
> > I'm generally using raw devices, but this time I've got too many to
> create,
> > and I prefer to use ocfs ( oracle cluster file system).
> > But as the cluster going to be used in a stable/production environment,
> I'm
> > a little bit cautious about ocfs, and looking for feedback from people
who
> > have experiences with it.
> > Is ocfs stable ? what about performances ? some bugs ?
> >
> > thanks
> > Majd
> >
> >
>
>
Received on Wed Oct 01 2003 - 03:37:08 CDT