Re: asm vs raw - the smackdown
- From: Jurijs Velikanovs <j.velikanovs@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: greg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 11:20:57 +1000
> Both ASM and raw use the exact same system calls to issue I/O, so
> there is no performance difference based on function calls/call stack.
It isn't true in all 100% cases according to real live experience.
During one of the projects I was part of we discovered that if you use
Oracle ASMLib driver to manage your devices Oracle issues
significantly different System IO calls comparing with case there ASM
sits on top of character devices directly.
Yury
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 4:16 AM, Greg Rahn <greg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Both ASM and raw use the exact same system calls to issue I/O, so
> there is no performance difference based on function calls/call stack.
>
> The ASM advantage is in the automatic striping of data over the LUNs
> (ASM disks) - the ASM logical layer. This reduces time to implement a
> well performing db layout as well as maintenance (disk additions &
> rebalanced) in the future. In other words, it takes much more time
> and effort to create a good layout with raw than it does with ASM.
>
>
> On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 1:30 AM, ~Jeff~ <jifjif@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Hi all
>> does anyone know of any papers or study comparing ASM vs raw performance?
>> We have a vendor deadset on raw, and the DbAs would rather not have to deal
>> with that!
>> thanks-
>> Jeff Wong
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Greg Rahn
> http://structureddata.org
> --
> //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
>
>
--
Jurijs
+371 29268222 (+2 GMT)
============================================
http://otn.oracle.com/ocm/jvelikanovs.html
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
