RE: ASM normal redundancy vs external redundancy
- From: "Best, David" <David.Best@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "oracle-l" <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 11:29:11 -0500
Hey Syed,
You'll need to provide some more information, as per some of the
responses you've already received. Are you testing on the same
hardware? Are the redundancy levels the same between normal and
external?
I don't believe ASM can read from multiple mirrors, so if your external
diskgroup is on a SAN then i'm not surprised you'd see a difference.
________________________________
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Kevin Closson
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 10:55 AM
To: oracle-l
Subject: RE: ASM normal redundancy vs external redundancy
Queries on tables which reside on the tablespace that is placed with
external redudancy ASM disk were giving faster result than tables which
reside with tablespace placed with ASM normal redundancy.
...Can you give some details about the workload (scans, random I/O) and
the actual performance difference you are seeing?
This message may contain privileged and/or confidential information. If
you have received this e-mail in error or are not the intended recipient, you
may not use, copy, disseminate or distribute it; do not open any attachments,
delete it immediately from your system and notify the sender promptly by e-mail
that you have done so. Thank you.
Other related posts:
