Dave,
I can not find the document so I have to take that comment back...although I'm
sure I have seen it?
To be honest, I never did nor tried this.
---METALINK
Doc ID: Note:252331.1
Subject: Update on OCFS for Linux
---oss.oracle
http://oss.oracle.com/projects/ocfs/dist/documentation/RHAS_best_practices.html
For optimal performance, each node should have its own, separate OCFS
archive log partition.
However, below are old docs regarding OCFS (arch log) issues...and note I had
all my problems with (more recent) OCFS version 1.0.12.x or 1.0.13.x.
---METALINK
3146671-OCFS ARCHIVE DESTINATION NOT RESPONDING TO UNIX COMMANDS
---METALINK Forum [This one gets ugly]
Real Application Clusters/High Availablity Technical Forum
Thread Status: Closed
Subject: Linux OCFS causes kernel panic on Red Hat AS
I (gladly) forgot about some of the ugly "all node server hangs" we had when
doing simple OS commands (ls -l) on OCFS during less than heavily server/db
load. It was so bad and we so scared, that no one would remove any arch logs
from the filesystem except during maintenance outages. Also, we had *current*
versions of all the OCFS tools and utilities... fileutils (O_DIRECT).
Oh yeah...is all coming back to me now...we had server hangs during the RMAN
archive log backup and "deletes" too! This was more than enough to lead us off
OCFS for arch logs.
Again, I can not find the actual Oracle supplied reference, but from personal
experience it would take a lot to get me to use OCFS for arch logs and likely
my other client would never go for it (again).
From overall OCFS experience I have not doubt (plus personal testing) that with
the benefit of OCFS comes a large performance penalty (overall, not jsut arch
log issues)...it doesn't perform as well as RAW...as expressed.
hth
Chris Marquez
Oracle DBA
-----Original Message-----
From: David Sharples [mailto:davidsharples@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Mon 10/3/2005 10:21 AM
To: Marquez, Chris
Cc: mueller_m@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Oracle RAC backup hardware/software recommendation?
Can you point me to the docs where it says dont put archivelogs on OCFS -
The OCFS docs says it is quite suitable
Thanks
Dave
On 10/3/05, Marquez, Chris <cmarquez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> We had a totally isolated disk for arch logs (on ocfs). Performance was
> horrible...a huge bottle neck.
> Trust me is was not the hardware (design). As soon as we went to EXT3
> file system the arch log bottle was gone.
>
> BTW, I have seem Oracle docs the recommend *NOT* putting arch logs on
> ocfs.
