Re: San & single point of failure
- From: "Rich Jesse" <rjoralist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "oracle_l" <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 15:12:06 -0600 (CST)
Good luck convincing anyone that you NEED two mirrored fast local drives,
but maybe this will help:
//www.freelists.org/post/oracle-l/Write-cache-for-a-SAN,7
If you manage to purchase the local drives, do NOT let them be partitioned
and do NOT let them be used for ANYTHING other than controlfiles. Yes,
there will be a big gaping 140+GB mirrored empty on that drive -- IT'S
SUPPOSED TO BE THAT WAY. It's cheap insurance.
Rich
> All,
> I have just been given a new server to put a database on. It is a SAN
> server, but the apparent layout of drives to me is:
> /redo1
> /redo2
> /big everything_else_disk
>
> This means that I have just put control_file1, 2, and 3 all in the same
> place - on /big. I thought that the whole point of multiple control files
> was to avoid single points of failure, such as a single location.
>
> I am told that SAN layout is to handle mirroring, striping, & hot spots
> behind the scene and I don't need to worry. If this is true, why do I need
> duplicates of the control file?
>
> Something smells fishy to me. Does anyone else have an opinion?
>
> -Claudia
>
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
