We are using ASM on our block devices, but our new system, which we already bought a NetApp for, will be using DirectNFS. We are testing now and it's working very well so far :) On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 4:05 AM, Nilo Segura <nilosegura@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Yes and No, we have also a large number of Oracle RACs and Single > instances on Netapp NFS filers that work very very well. > The stability of these systems is amazing and thanks to that I sleep > very well :) > > > Nilo Segura > Oracle Support - IT/DB > CERN - Geneva > Switzerland > > > > On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 9:49 AM, Martin Berger <martin.a.berger@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > Stefano, > > > > at least CERN uses ASM. > > https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/PDBService/HAandPerf > > And i do not see ASM as additional layer, it reduces one: > > (ASM instead of Volume Manger + FileSystem). > > > > Can you please specify the 'tests over ASM usually fails', so I can learn > > from these? > > thank you, > > Martin > > > > On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 09:34, Stefano Cislaghi <s.cislaghi@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > >> > >> Hello, > >> > >> despite all data and stats IMHO ASM sucks. ASM is an additional layer, > >> managed through an Oracle instance to manage files in a strange > manner.I've > >> never seen a big oracle installation, for example in a TLC environment > where > >> I work using ASM. All tests over ASM usually fails. Actually use of pure > raw > >> devices should be preferable, better if using 8gbit fiber instead iscsi > on a > >> 1gb ethernet. Yes, managing raw devices is not easy and usually is not a > DBA > >> work. Also, type of storage is really important. > >> > >> Ste > >> > >> -- > >> http://www.stefanocislaghi.eu > >> > >> > > > > > -- > //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l > > > -- Thomas Roach 813-404-6066 troach@xxxxxxxxx