Re: ASM and using more than one diskgroup
- From: "Finn Jorgensen" <finn.oracledba@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: ricks12345@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 12:22:39 -0500
Rick,
One reason off the top of my head would be that in some of the earlier
versions of 10gR2 (.1 and .2) when the diskgroup was large and you
were adding another significant chunk of space to it, the
redistribution of the data could take a significant amount of time
(like days).
Another one could be if your LUNs/partitions for whatever reason are
not the same size. If that happens there will be unused space on the
larger LUNs.
Finn
On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 8:08 AM, Rick Ricky <ricks12345@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I am currently using ASM with 1 production database. are there any reasons
> why I would consider using more than one diskgroup? This is just an opinion
> based queston. One reason might be if i want to spread IO on different
> disks.
>
> I am on a SAN. I have my SAN administrator present me space as follows
>
> Raid Group 1 -> Lun 1-> Linux Partition 1
> Raid Group 2 -> Lun 2 -> Linix Partition 2
>
> I can use the different diskgroups to spread out my IO. Or would I want 1
> diskgroup and then enable oracle striping and mirroring ?
>
> This design is in contrast to just creating a black box on the SAN where I
> might get multiple Luns, but I don't know what disks/raid groups they are
> pointing to.
>
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
