RE: a quick poll regarding the 11gR2 OFA
- From: "Crisler, Jon" <Jon.Crisler@xxxxxxx>
- To: <bill@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Oracle-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 10:50:39 -0400
I agree with Bill, and our standards are similar to his. Oracle binaries are
big enough and important enough to justify its own filesystem. Especially with
RAC where you can get gigabytes of log files (alert.log, CRS stuff), but IMO
even non-RAC systems should have its own filesystem.
-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Bill Zakrzewski
Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2010 10:27 AM
To: Oracle-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: a quick poll regarding the 11gR2 OFA
We use something a bit different......
/software for the Oracle product
/data1, /data2, /data3 for the database files....
IMHO, consistency across all servers is more important than what you call the
mount points....
Bill
On May 11, 2010, at 10:15 AM, Rich Jesse wrote:
>> A quick poll.
>> The 11gR2 linux OFA version seems to push to use a directory such as
>> ╲/u01/â•œâ•ˇ instead of ╲/opt/oracle/╡
>>
>> Which directory are you currently using?
>
>
>> Are you going to change your directory structure to match this new OFA
>> structure?
>
>
> --
> //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
>
>
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
