Re: Naive view of Oracle on RAID Subsystem?

In article <D1Jow9.DHo_at_world.std.com>, lparsons_at_world.std.com (Lee E Parsons) says:
>
 

>If you really ment that you don't have to worry about
>recoverability because your running a Raid5 subsystem then I
>would disagree with you. Depending on just the extra drive
>to save you in all possible recoveray senarios is an accident
>waiting to happen.
>
>If you ment something else: "Never Mind"

I didn't mean to say that you could throw caution to the wind -- Roll around in fields of holly -- and trust that the great god RAID would take care of things. No this is not what I meant to say.

In fact Raid will only do two things for your database (two large things however.) 1) in the event that a single disk should crash, your database will continue to chug along (with ~25% overhead while the hot spare is written). 2)Stripe the data over all disks in the RAID set.

If we are trying to say that item 1 means no recovery worries and item 2 means no disk I/O worries than we are probably fooling ourselves.

I would still take a 'stringent' look at my backup/recovery needs and determine how RAID technology impacts them.

As far as recovery you might want to consider RAID as an extra layer. As far as disk I/O -- It would seem that some things are taken care of by RAID and are in fact out of your hands.

Marcus Anthony
Dept of Public Safety
Santa Fe, NM Received on Fri Dec 30 1994 - 17:09:17 CET