RE: Database Storage

  • From: "Goulet, Dick" <richard.goulet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <mhyder@xxxxxxxx>, <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 16:10:41 -0500

        ell, we mainly use the leaders of storage systems, namely EMC,
Sun, and HP.  We also always use SAN vs. NAS just because direct attach
has less network volatility, even if your using a dedicated network
card.

        One question I would have for the BlueArc folks is why they
recommended NAS and how hard would it be to switch to SAN connections,
especially fiber.  I'd also recommend to them that they bear the brunt
of the costs, at least to save their reputation that is.

        Looking for a forklift replacement is going to be very costly
because of the expense to acquire the solution, get it installed, move
the data, and validate that all went well.  Then your into performance
testing and troubleshooting with a completely new tool set which could
make things worse over the short term at a minimum.  No better to stay
with the installed solution, but fix the problem which IMHO is the NAS
configuration.  Also one might look at the configuration.  You could
have disks that are servicing more than one task.  My experience says
that if a part of a disk is assigned to database activity, then the
remaining portions thereof do not get mixed into other applications,
like NFS mounts, Wintel shares, etc.....  You might also look at the sys
admins.  Had a database crash once because the sysadmins did not share
information on a timely basis.  Consequently a hyper volume in an EMC
Symmetric got assigned to two mount points at the same time.  HUMM, now
where did that database data file go???

______________________________________________________________
Dick Goulet / Capgemini
North America P&C / East Business Unit
Senior Oracle DBA / Hosting
Office: 508.573.1978 / Mobile: 508.742.5795 / www.capgemini.com
Fax: 508.229.2019 /  Email: richard.goulet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
45 Bartlett St. / Marlborough, MA 01752

Together: the Collaborative Business Experience 
______________________________________________________________


-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mir M. Mirhashimali
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 6:06 PM
To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Database Storage

Dear Oracle-L,

I have been tasked to find what storage solutions is best for our 
databases. Our current storage solution had been performing very badly 
not in terms of through put but in terms off availability. We have both 
Oracle and SQL Server(2000 and 2005). I am interested in knowing what 
other people are using and what strategy they are following to make it 
high-availability. RAC is not an option for us. right now we have 
redundant servers and NFS mounts to our storage system. and similar 
setup for SQL Server. with a active-passive cluster connected to
storage.

thanks

-- 
Mir M. Mirhashimali
Oracle Systems Manager
Database Architecture, Enterprise Applications
Rice University
(713) 348 6365

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l



This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is 
the property of the Capgemini Group. It is intended only for the person to whom 
it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient,  you are not authorized 
to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate,  distribute, or use this message or 
any part thereof. If you receive this  message in error, please notify the 
sender immediately and delete all  copies of this message.


--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l


Other related posts: