RE: RAC and ASM disk layout

  • From: "Kevin Closson" <kevinc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 07:54:04 -0700

        both bugs referred to in this notes are fixed in and
they do not seem to lead to data loss or corruption (they resemble a lot
what Alex refers to in his blog note about ASM). 

...the point is whether you think those bugs were rooted in the
or where they simple code bugs. Do you really think a bug that forces
all instances 
out during a rebalance was due to a code bug like an errant pointer? No.
were implementation bugs. To a layman, the difference may seem moot if
the remedy is the 
same (e.g., Opatch or patchset upgrade), but the fact is there are types
bugs. The bugs Niall pointed out are they types of bugs that get found
when things go wrong. Unless your acceptance plan has a long list of
such operations (e.g., RAC instance impact during offline disk
rebalance) you
are essentially judging the book by the cover.
The thread that started this line of questioning came from me and I
right up front that since ASM is optional software it is a matter of
choice. It
is important that forums like this look deeply into such options. It is
intellectually curious thing to do. 


Other related posts: