Re: dedicated spindles and Oracle
- From: "Rajeev Prabhakar" <rprabha01@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: ryan_gaffuri@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2007 21:33:10 -0400
Ryan
We did this excercise few months back. Basically, we tried a combination of
different LUN sizes and RAID levels to ascertain
the combination that worked well (in terms of I/O throughput) for our SAN
environment. The factors we considered for LUN
sizes were manageability/recoverability/growth rates/snapshot storage space
required. Our implementation is 10g RAC
ASM/SAN on 64-bit linux platform.
Rajeev
On 9/15/07, ryan_gaffuri@xxxxxxxxxxx <ryan_gaffuri@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I was talking to an Oracle guy who also works with SANs. This is what he
> told me. For optimal performance do the following
>
> 2 redo log groups each with dedicated spindles
> 2 archive logs each with dedicated spindles
>
> data data files have their own dedicates spindles with several lines and
> spread the data files out
> index data files do the same thing but have their own dedicated spindles
>
> control files can be placed on the same spindles as data files, however,
> check point activity on systems with large numbers of data files especially
> when doing hot backups may require control files having their own dedicated
> spindles.
>
> What is your opinion? Is there any way to estimate a good starting point
> to test LUN sizes for performance? Not sure what sizes I should ask for to
> begin my performance tests. I was thinking of running bench marks with
> several different sized LUNs.
> --
> //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
