Of course, it's entirely possible that the two ZFSSA units that we
received are the only two lemons off of the assembly line. That would
explain by the ZFSSA support techs had so much trouble finding/fixing
the problems (most of which are still not fixed).
Last summer I couldn't have been more excited to get these units
installed and start using them. But it was clear from the start that
things were going wrong, and it was a series of problems from the
start in various components of the ZFSSA. Even better was the fact
that the two units each had unique problems, failing differently than
their counterpart.
So, given the problems we've seen, considering both the quantity and
severity, and how completely unimpressed we were with the "one-stop
shop" for support that was one of the big selling points, we can in no
way consider moving our production databases onto it, and are looking
for alternative storage to remove our staging and unit test databases
off of it. Even if/when the open bugs get fixed and someone discovers
the cause of the NFS hangs, the trust is completely gone in these systems.
Don.
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 2:41 PM, Don Seiler <don@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:don@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
We've had nothing but problems with them from installation
misconfigurations to hardware failures (two silent NIC failures in
addition to the disk failures we get warnings about, and one
instance of the entire appliance IO module crashing). The last few
months we'd see intermittent NFS hanging for 5-6 minutes to all
mounts from the ZFSSA, resulting in those databases crashing. That
is the most worrisome. If the storage can't stay online, then we
have bigger problems than worrying about speed.
Add on to that the less than stellar support recommendations we've
gotten flip-flopping around Infiniband recommendations, write-bias
setttings, bonding configurations, etc. and it's been a complete
nightmare that's left us still on our old storage that is starting
to fail. I have zero confidence in the ZFSSA (at least the two
machines that we've been sold) to run our database. This is 14
months after installation and they're still not in production and
never will be.
You say you have many customers on it, but we found this hard to
believe given all of the bugs that we tripped over along the way,
including a couple that were apparently discovered by us. We would
have expected support to give us a heads-up about all of the
needed patches if they have so many customers that have done the
same thing. Other than the recommended Direct NFS patches MOS
note, we've been basically stumbling around in the dark. At
various points, support suggests patches that only *might* fix the
problem ... as if they aren't sure themselves. And those patches
don't ever fix the problem.
Don.
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 2:18 PM, Kevin Jernigan
<kevin.jernigan@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:kevin.jernigan@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Don,
Why do you recommend not using ZFSSA for live databases yet?
We (Oracle) have many customers using ZFSSA for live
production environments - including our own IT department,
with >200PBs of ZFSSA storage in place for applications that
support all aspects of our business...
-Kevin J
--
Kevin Jernigan
Senior Director Product Management
Advanced Compression, Hybrid Columnar
Compression (HCC), Database File System
(DBFS), SecureFiles, Database Smart Flash
Cache, Total Recall, Database Resource
Manager (DBRM), Direct NFS Client (dNFS),
Continuous Query Notification (CQN),
Index Organized Tables (IOT), Information
Lifecycle Management (ILM)
+1-650-607-0392 <tel:%2B1-650-607-0392> (o)
+1-415-710-8828 <tel:%2B1-415-710-8828> (m)
On 10/16/14, 11:32 AM, Don Seiler wrote:
Yes in 12c DNFS works on NFSv4. In fact, NFSv4 is required if
you plan to use OISP (Oracle Intelligent Storage Protocol) to
talk to their ZFSSA. Although I would not suggest using the
ZFSSA to run live databases yet. Should be OK for FRA uses.
Don.
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 10:46 AM, Kevin Jernigan
<kevin.jernigan@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:kevin.jernigan@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
As of Oracle Database 12c, dNFS works with both NFSv3 and
NFSv4...KJ
--
Kevin Jernigan
Senior Director Product Management
Advanced Compression, Hybrid Columnar
Compression (HCC), Database File System
(DBFS), SecureFiles, Database Smart Flash
Cache, Total Recall, Database Resource
Manager (DBRM), Direct NFS Client (dNFS),
Continuous Query Notification (CQN),
Index Organized Tables (IOT), Information
Lifecycle Management (ILM)
+1-650-607-0392 <tel:%2B1-650-607-0392> (o)
+1-415-710-8828 <tel:%2B1-415-710-8828> (m)
On 10/16/14, 8:37 AM, Hameed, Amir wrote:
I don't believe DNFS is certified to work with NFSv4.
*From:*oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of
*Hans Forbrich
*Sent:* Thursday, October 16, 2014 11:30 AM
*To:* oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
*Subject:* Re: Is filesystemio_options relevant when the
database is on ASM ?
On 16/10/2014 3:35 AM, Frits Hoogland wrote:
When using NFS underneath ASM, I've witnessed
filesystemio_options being honoured by the database,
which means it needs setting it to 'setall' for the
combination AIO+DIO. Which makes sense, because you
need to create a file on a (NFS) filesystem to be
used as ASM disk device.
Then it becomes important to know which NFS?
I believe DNFS behaves different than standard NFSv3
which may be different again from NFSv4
/Hans
--
Don Seiler
http://www.seiler.us
--
Don Seiler
http://www.seiler.us
--
Don Seiler
http://www.seiler.us
