Re: A Very Basic Oracle on VmWare System

  • From: Tim Gorman <tim.evdbt@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: ian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 10:43:35 -0600

Ian,

I'll throw this out there...

Delphix manages virtual Oracle databases and virtual ORACLE_HOME binaries, which are presented to database servers using NFS mounts. Because they are NFS mounted, they are fast and easy to unmount and remount to another database server (a.k.a. VDB migration). Downtime is still required, as VDB and vFile migration requires that the database instance be shutdown and restarted, but the VDB migration operation takes minutes regardless of the size of the database and binaries, and can be operated from a graphical console or automated from an API. ORACLE_HOME binary virtualization is only a convenient option if desired, and that locally-installed ORACLE_HOME binaries are certainly common and supported.

Virtual databases are not intended for mission-critical production usage, only for non-production usage (i.e. DEV, TEST, etc) or non-mission-critical or temporary production usage. Not sure if you're considering VMs for production usage anyway?

Virtualization ain't just for servers anymore...

Hope this helps...

-Tim

Disclaimer:  I work for Delphix



On 6/30/17 09:25, MacGregor, Ian A. wrote:

I was hoping to check with my VM admin before I replied, but could not. I do know the methodology she is using moves the entire VM, both files and processes. The had mentioned one VM which takes 20 minutes to move due to the size of its associated files. I thought she was doing this through vMotion, but I may be wrong. Anyway, even if vMotion is the methodology, it sounds as if normally it is only used to migrate processes and not files.

Thanks you for the assistance

Ian


On Jun 29, 2017, at 6:10 AM, Andrew Kerber <andrew.kerber@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:andrew.kerber@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

Vmotion is only possible on shared storage. But no, a single physical lun does not provide enough protection. Most people use a san for their storage in VMware, your configuration is unusual in that it is on local disks.

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 2:38 PM, MacGregor, Ian A. <ian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

    Seth both.  I don’t see  how a single  physical  LUN provides
     enough  protection.   As far as moving of the databases is the
    even  possible with this setup?

    IAN

    On Jun 28, 2017, at 11:57 AM, Seth Miller
    <sethmiller.sm@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:sethmiller.sm@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

    Ian,

    Can you clarify your concern? Is the problem that you can't
    migrate your databases without taking an outage, or that the LUN
    doesn't offer enough protection for your database files?


    Seth Miller

    On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Andrew Kerber
    <andrew.kerber@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:andrew.kerber@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

        Most people run their VM's over shared storage, which allows
        for vmotion and storage vmotion.  When I am setting up small
        stuff, not enterprise, but want to make sure of the data I
        use ASM and ASM native data protection, ie standard
        redundancy.  On the OS side, we can use snapshots.

        On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 11:05 AM, MacGregor, Ian A.
        <ian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

We run our VMs on local disk; i.e, no SAN or NAS. Let’s say physical machine a has 24 disks. The
            standard configuration to create a 22 disk RAID 10
            physical LUN.  Then carve the virtual file systems out
            of that.    I don’t like this idea because,  to doesn’t
            provide enough protection for  the control and  online
            redo log files.
            The reason for setting up one physical LUN  is to allow
            for VM migration.

            I  presently have several small databases  running on
            several  VMs.  I insisted on at least two physical LUNs.
The inability to migrate VMs means the possibility of additional outages should their hypervisors need to
            be shutdown, and the outage cannot be coordinated  with
            other patching.   So the only  databases I have on VMs
            are ones which  do not have to be up 24 X 365

            I’m not sure how VmWare has become so popular with this
            restriction.  We are replacing our present  physical
            machines which host the VMs.   The main difference is
            the new servers are all SSD.    This is highly
            attractive, but the VmWare administrator  has indicated
            their will be no exceptions for Oracle

            If it is standard to  care the VM file systems out of
            one physical LUNs what is being done to protect the
            control file and  redo logs.

            Ian MacGregor
            SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory
            ian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>




-- Andrew W. Kerber

        'If at first you dont succeed, dont take up skydiving.'






--
Andrew W. Kerber

'If at first you dont succeed, dont take up skydiving.'


Other related posts: