Re: Moving db to linux
- From: "Nuno Souto" <dbvision@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 00:21:02 +1100
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jesse, Rich" <Rich.Jesse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> I haven't yet, but I'm getting the feeling that ext3 is not preferred. If
> not, then what? I've already had ext2 trash my entire "/", even though I
> was doing a mke2fs on a separate RAID MP, so that's not an option.
>
> JFS? XFS? FAT? WHY one over the other?
>
This is one of those situations I feel you should consider the "need"
versus the "standard". There is no point whatsoever with Linux in
"standardising" on a file system. It is counter to the ENTIRE philosophy
of Unix and Linux.
First of all, consider the requirements.
Condition:
"/" (and other "system" file systems) are where you load the system software
and where you'll store mostly many short files of either text or binary
(compiled code) data. It needs to cope well with volatility as the OS
dynamically allocates and drops files and new space to existing files.
Ie, the file system internal structures CHANGE, so you need journaling to
avoid errors on sudden system stoppage.
Solution:
Therefore, you need to protect yourself using at the very least a
journalised
file system. ext3, JFS, Reiser (and PLEASE nobody mention the f/s benchmark
site,I am FULLY aware how wrong it is!). Chose one geared for fast delivery
on
small to medium sized files. reiserfs is a good choice, so is JFS.
Condition:
With the Oracle data and assuming you want to use file systems to store
the datafiles, what you have is VERY LARGE files that are not often created,
dropped or added to IN SIZE. Which means the file system structures
themselves do NOT need to be journalised, they hardly ever change.
Note: I said the file system internal structures, NOT your data.
Yes, there is a HUGE difference!
Solution:
So, for your data either use raw or a simple, no frills file system
with sufficient features to give you performance: noatime, asynch I/O
if you can find it, otherwise at the very least direct I/O. ext2
will do the job, so will ext3 with journal turned off, etcetc. Do NOT
use a file system geared for small file server, like reiserfs, FAT, etcetc.
And that's it in a nutshell. Do NOT look for a one-size-fits-all
file system: there is NO such animal.
Cheers
Nuno Souto
in sunny Sydney, Australia
dbvision@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
----------------------------------------------------------------
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.
--
Archives are at //www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/
FAQ is at //www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Other related posts:
