Raid5 Vs Raid0+1 -- Raw Vs Solaris 9 Concurrent Direct IO UFS
- From: Deen Dayal <deen.dayal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 14:17:30 -0400
We are planning to move our current database to new Hardware Sun 12k +
Hitachi SE 9970.
Our current database runs on Sun A5000 array with Raid0+1 on raw devices.
Sun engineer who is here at our site for implementation of Hitachi SE9970
suggests that we should go Raid5 ( 3 + 1P ) in the parity group as RAID5
gives better read performance than raid0+1 and any writes are going to the
cache any way, so we should not be worried about write performance. There is
16GB cache on the Hitachi. Database is going to be striped across 10 parity
groups and each parity group consists of 4 physical disks.
Our application is about 60 to 70% reads most of the time, kind of a DSS and
for few batch jobs it is 90% write and 10% read. Database is not that big
just 200GB.
He also suggested us to use UFS instead of RAW as Solaris 9 has lot
improvements in UFS especially with Concurrent Direct I/O and can perform
better than RAW.
I am wondering anybody out there with real world experience with similar
Hardware can throw some light on these 2 topics. If anybody can point any
links or documents discussing these topics, highly appreciated.
Thanks
Deen
----------------------------------------------------------------
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:
