Hi, The current database on the Solaris server uses ASM. The new server will not be using ASM. Regards. Peter Hitchman wrote: > Hi. > Given that you are using ASM then I see no reason to not use OMF, it > makes it a lot easier if you just let Oracle do the management. When > you drop a tablespace, it removes the data files for you. The only > reason I would not use OMF would in fact be if the system were not > using ASM, because then to spread the datafiles across disk you have > to change the location where the database will put them. > > Regards > > Pete > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 5:32 PM, D'Hooge Freek <Freek.DHooge@xxxxxxxxx > <mailto:Freek.DHooge@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote: > > Well, I'm using it for several databases at customer sites and I > must say I like it. > It makes the administration easier and gives less chance for > errors. I especially like it for dataguard environments (no more > *name_convert parameters). > > The database files are all placed on a san, so there is also no > real reason to spread out the datafiles over various filesystems. > > As the current environment is using ASM, you are in fact already > using OMF. So, the only difference in administration would be that > you can now see your datafiles on the filesystem. > > > regards, > > Freek D'Hooge > Uptime > Oracle Database Administrator > email: freek.dhooge@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:freek.dhooge@xxxxxxxxx> > tel +32(0)3 451 23 82 > http://www.uptime.be > disclaimer: www.uptime.be/disclaimer <http://www.uptime.be/disclaimer> > ________________________________________ > From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > [oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>] On Behalf Of Tony Sequeira > [tony@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:tony@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>] > Sent: 15 December 2009 17:20 > To: Oracle List > Subject: Oracle-Managed Files - your views > > Hi group, > > I have to move a 10g (10.2.0.3) application off a Solaris 10 machine > (using ASM) to a Windows 2003 server (don't ask). > > The required application is only one smallish schema, so I'm going to > pre-create a database (10.2.0.4) and use export/import. > > I'm thinking of using OMF. Does anyone here have any views on > OMF. My > research has come up with the following: > > Primary advantage seems to be management (no need to specify file > names/locations...) > > The list of disadvantages I have found are all dismissable for this > particular application. > > File System only - I'm OK with that > Naming Standards - No issue for this database > Tuning - Again no issue for this database. > > Regards. > > -- > S. Anthony Sequeira > ++ > It is bad luck to be superstitious. > -- Andrew W. Mathis > ++ > > -- > //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l-- > //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l > > > > > > -- > Regards > > Pete -- S. Anthony Sequeira ++ "May your future be limited only by your dreams." -- Christa McAuliffe ++