RE: ASM
- From: "Bort, Guillermo" <guillermo.bort@xxxxxxx>
- To: <sacrophyte@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 12:05:11 -0500
I have plenty of experience with Cluster, both active/passive and Real
Application Cluster (specially with TAF). I began my worklife with
Oracle, and I am used to it's products and how they work, and therefore
my comments are heavyly biased.
However, it is undeniable that Sun's Cluster Filesystem does not work
with RAC. (with A/P clusters it works fine). ASM does not lack
friendlyness any more than Veritas does. In fact, if you use the
intended tool to administer it (that is Enterprise Manager) it's highly
user friendly and simple to manage.
About it's versatility, you can even define what type of stripping you
want to use... so I'd say it's rather versatile. With the obvious
exception that it ONLY supports Oracle Database Files.
regards
Guillermo Alan Bort
DBA / DBA Main Team
EDS, an HP company
From: Charles Schultz [mailto:sacrophyte@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 12:59 PM
To: Bort, Guillermo
Cc: niall.litchfield@xxxxxxxxx; jkstill@xxxxxxxxx;
dannorris@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; VIVEK_SHARMA@xxxxxxxxxxx; Greg Rahn; ORACLE-L
Subject: Re: ASM
On the flip side, we like our SA's. However, we are lacking in clustered
experience (in any group). We have read whitepapers from both Sun and
Oracle saying that their cluster stack is better than the other. What
about real world experiences? Has anyone used both and have a somewhat
objective comparison?
Oracle certainly picked a controversial direction with ASM. =) I still
do not understand how Oracle has provided a really cool with ASM that is
horribly lacking in friendliness and versatility.
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
