RE: Cluster File System Versus ASM for RAC Deployment in Production?... Pros & Cons
- From: "Crisler, Jon" <Jon.Crisler@xxxxxxx>
- To: "Oracle-l" <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2007 12:56:27 -0500
I think this is a big factor- VCS can cost a lot of money, while ASM is
free.
OCFS2 has an advantage in one area- training, because it appears as a
standard file system. Once you get past the initial install, it looks
the same as a regular filesystem. Its also free.
ASM is reportedly faster that OCFS2 or cluster file systems, but I have
not seen that in the real world (yet). Its also free.
-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Pedro Espinoza
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2007 2:16 AM
To: VIVEK_SHARMA@xxxxxxxxxxx; Oracle-l
Subject: Re: Cluster File System Versus ASM for RAC Deployment in
Production?... Pros & Cons
Any new thing requires training. Big shops tend to use cluster file
systems such as VCS for many other things like nfs, besides rac. So,
if there is an expertise in VCS, and if they dont care much abt
licensing costs, go ahead and use vcs.
> Additionally does ASM administration need additional Skill Set /
Training
> versus administration on Cluster File System(CFS), for RAC?
>
> If so, in what context?
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
