ASM, archivelogging and LUNs
- From: Dba DBA <oracledbaquestions@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: ORACLE-L <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 12:59:00 -0400
Clusterware(2 nodes) 11.2.0.4
DBs: 11.2.0.4
2 DBs on this this cluster. One DB will run in 1 node only due to excessive
pinging. This is being done already. This is per Oracle Support. DB is
migrating to us. So basing this on customer information.
Per Customer DBs, both of these DBs generate significant amounts of Archive.
150+ GBS/Day for the db going to 1 node
60+ GBs/day for the DB going to 2 nodes.
Right now I have 1 LUN for both DBs. Would having separate ASM Disk groups
for each of these spread over the same LUN do anything to help performance?
LUNs are logical so they don't tell me how the DBs are mapped to the
backplane. This is a very large data center environment (2000+ Oracle DBs),
these means things are standardized. In the past when I work with large
DBs, but alot less of them I can get alot of custom configuration. Such as
many LUNs that I can use to map ASM disk groups too and then working the
Storage Team to map the logical LUNs acrss the back plane of the SAN(I have
no idea how they do this, I just work with them. We usually work off a
spreadsheet and they do it, I just tell them the I/O foot print which I get
from the DB).
Is there any value in multiple ASM disk groups on the same LUN? Before I go
back to the storage team with questions, I want to make sure I understand
how this works better so I know what to ask. In a very large environment,
getting one off special configurations is asking for alot. Non-standard is
alot harder to support.
I know some of you know alot more about Sys Admin/Storage than I do. I dont
want to waste the Storage teams time. Sorry for the vageries of this post,
but I'm really not sure what to ask. I would wait to see that it is
necessary, but I want to make sure I really understand what is going on
'outside of the DB at the SAN level'.
Other related posts:
