RE: FileSystem (Volume) Sizes and Names (questions)
- From: Hemant K Chitale <hkchital@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: kevinc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 23:50:58 +0800
Life isn't always that simple.
Got 100 different database servers from 10 years old to a few months old,
using DASD to SAN to NAS, varied OSs and versions, varied FileSystems.
Periodically we need to add disks and not all the storages (in fact very
few !)
support dynamic resizing.
Furthermore, there had, in the past , been resistance to buy
more hard disks to support RAID-10. RAID-5 used to be the
standard.
Now, in fact there is resistance to buying *ANY* hard disks,
only some high profile projects are allowed any new hardware.
Hemant
At 12:17 AM Friday, Kevin Closson wrote:
Why on earth do you want to do that? Filesystems are supposed
to make it simpler to build that 100GB database. Get a single
filesystem with SAME under it and make your life easier. If you
need more space later, grow the volume, gorw the filesystem and
go on with your life.
Hemant K Chitale
http://web.singnet.com.sg/~hkchital
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
