TJ, There is no "storage pool" when it comes to ASM. ASM groups logical devices into a group. Therefore each ASM disk group has it's own logical devices (which in this case map directly to physical devices). But, your point is valid. There is no I/O fencing. The only place to get that is with the Exadata/SuperCluster. Your other options is to create separate disk groups for different workloads but you can't do that (not in a way that is supported anyway) on the ODA. However, you can use the database resource manager to limit the I/O that a user or a database can use. The exception to this rule is the ODA X5-2 which has additional SSDs that can be used for database files or for database flash cache. The devices are in a separate disk group. Seth Miller On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 4:26 PM, TJ Kiernan <tkiernan@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The disk groups all use the same underlying storage pool, so long as > you’re using the hardware in appliance mode (I **THINK**). You can > reconfigure the hardware and assign physical disks to storage pools, but > the default is one big mass of disk that ASM diskgroups, volumes, acfs > mounts, etc spread out across. This is the impression I had from the > Oracle sales guys I talked about, which made me think twice about > consolidating OLTP & DW instances onto a single ODA. > > > > ***usually I wouldn’t be posting with such uncertainty, but given the lack > of responses on the last thread, I figured it’s worth mentioning for > followup with someone who knows for sure. > > > > HTH, > > T. J. > > > > > > *From:* Jeff Chirco [mailto:backseatdba@xxxxxxxxx] > *Sent:* Friday, March 27, 2015 4:21 PM > *To:* TJ Kiernan > *Cc:* oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; MARK BRINSMEAD; Seth Miller; > jack.applewhite@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > *Subject:* Re: To ODA or Not? > > > > I was under the impression that you could carve out separate sections of > the disk groups to allocate to different areas. Correct me if I am wrong on > this. However our current SAN is set up like with with just one aggregate. > So yeah sometimes when I run an massive query in our DW, our other database > get affected. > > Oh and I forgot to mention that when I ran dbms_calibrate_io I got back > 3400mbps of IO with about 11ms of latency. Not sure what you get on the ODA > storage. > > > > On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 2:05 PM, TJ Kiernan <tkiernan@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I’ve been glancing at the ODA since version 1, which was our last hardware > refresh. We ended up rolling our own, but we’ll take a serious look again > when we outgrow the existing kit. (3 years ago, you could buy a box with > only 4 cores. I’m not sure if that’s even possible still.) > > > > The one concern I would add to your current list is I/O. If I recall > correctly, the storage is one big mass of disk (plus the SSDs for redo). > If someone kills the I/O channels in your dev environment, can it adversely > affect any other (such as production) databases running on the ODA? > > > > Maybe that’s not a concern with your systems, but it’ll mean one ODA for > our busy database that makes the money plus one at the DR site. > > > > Thanks, > > T. J. > > > > > > *From:* oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto: > oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Jeff Chirco > *Sent:* Friday, March 27, 2015 3:39 PM > *To:* oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; MARK BRINSMEAD; Seth Miller; > jack.applewhite@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > *Subject:* To ODA or Not? > > > > I had another thread started about the ODA but I wanted to separate it out. > > I am currently up for a hardware refresh and tossing around the idea of > Oracle Database Appliance. But in my environment I am not sure if it just > that easy. > > To start, everything currently runs on Windows 2008 R2 64bit. So that is > our first big change, going to Linux. > > *We have 4 servers:* > > - Production 1: Runs 5 EE 11.2.0.4 database's but really 4 of those > are mostly idle with one acting as our main system. This a 4 CPU box so > with a .5 multiplier we are licensed for 2 CPU. And currently we are not > even utilizing half of the CPU and about half of the memory which is 96gb. > - Test 1: Same server and license as above it just runs all test and > dev databases > - Production 2: Runs 3 SE1 11.2.0.4 database for third party > applications but the communication to Prod 1 for some data. CPU is also > lightly used on here. > - Test 2: 1 SE 11.2.0.4 database on here but this server is not that > important. > > > - 5th server acts as our Data Guard server for just 1 of the database > running on Prod 1. This is a single CPU server. Meant as a last resort. > > *Current Storage*: NetApp SAN, 27tb. The NetApp SAN is nice with ability > to quickly take a database snapshot/backup (1-2minutes) and then make a > database clone from that in less than 5 minutes for our 400gb database. > Plus it has the ability to Snap Mirror all the snapshots to our off site > location. > > If we were to get an ODA since we don't run or have a current need for > RAC, > > 1. One solution would be to have one of the servers for Production and > other for Test/Dev. I would combine all of our databases into this one > machine. Then they would all be EE and probably go to 12c and plug able if > I can get the budget approval for it. But there is another added expense. > 2. The solution I am thinking makes most sense is turning VM on kind > of mimicking our current environment so I can keep our third party systems > separate and on a separate database version if need be. But still all on > Linux. Then I can create another VM for Enterprise Manager which I > currently have running on Windows. > > But what do I do about our existing snapshot technology with NetApp and > the mirroring. I believe there is not data mirroring technology with the > ODA storage. Then are we relying on Data Guard everything or moving backups > some other way? I heard the ODA has the snap clone technology so we could > still create dev clones quickly right? Is this an extra cost? > > Speaking of Data Guard, since we probably wont be buying two ODA's, we > will have to stand up our own stand alone Oracle Linux server and support > that and buy support for it. > > Speaking of buying only 1. I dont't think I can get approval for that > unless they give it to us dirt cheap. This means we have no way to test out > ODA patches and updates. This sounds scary to me. > > Ok so that was a long email. Thank you in advanced for anybody that got > through it and chimes in and I'm aware that this probably requires a deeper > discussion. > > Jeff > > > > > > >