Re: Oracle 10g (ASM vs Veritas Clustered FS)

"DA Morgan" <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote in message news:41d33d55$1_1_at_127.0.0.1...
> jeff_vosburg_at_aliases.com wrote:
>
>> In comp.databases.oracle.server Howard J. Rogers <hjr_at_dizwell.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I can't answer your actual question, because I'm not overly familiar with
>>>the Veritas option. But 'only using RAW' and 'depending entirely on RMAN
>>>for backups/restoress' don't strike me as major drawbacks. Quite the
>>>contrary. :-)
>>
>>
>> I'm not a DBA, just trying to help one out. We don't use rman much,
>> and generally rely on cold backups. I know, everywhere else people
>> seem to use RMAN, our DBA's are slow like that :)
>>
>> As a sysadmin I'm not big on raw volumes but unfortunately our standards
>> are pretty loose in this area.
>>
>>>Bear in mind that ASM is a good deal more than 'friendly raw'. The data
>>>redundancy features alone are worth having in my book.
>>
>>
>> Yeah, from what I can see...ASM has a lot of nice features but everything
>> we have goes on EMC DMX's and Veritas also offers similar solutions.
>>
>> At least, from what I can see (hence my posting).
>
> There is a lot of value in ASM. Balancing i/o load when new volumes are
> added or volumes are removed being you should consider: Veritas can't
> touch it.
>

Does ASM have any value if the filesystems are mounted on SAN devices, and the i/o load management is done by the storage processors of the SAN box ?

Matthias

> But our DBAs should be using RMAN and if they are not management should
> consider finding some new DBAs.
> --
> Daniel A. Morgan
> University of Washington
> damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
> (replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
Received on Wed Dec 29 2004 - 17:56:33 CST