Re: What's better: ASMlib or RAW...

On 10 May 2007 22:19:14 -0700, oracle_man <oracle_man_at_yahoo.com> wrote:

>Call to arms:
>
>
>I: What is the better choice on x86_64,RHEL4u4(2.6x kernel), EMC
>CX300 SAN, EMC powerpath 4.5x, Oracle 10.2.0.3.0, RAC, ASM?
>
> 1) ASMlib accessing block dev, asynch i/o
> 2) Raw device access via /dev/raw/rawX
>
>II: Which i/o scheduler do you use with each respective technology
>stack?
>
> 1) CFQ
> 2) Deadline
> 3) No-OP
> 4) Anticipator
>
>III: Last question: Which parameter do you use for the above?
>
> 1) DISK_ASYNCH_IO
> 2) FILESYSTEMIO_OPTIONS
upgrade SAN if IO is important.

CX500 is a much better option.. We've had good results with vxfs + odm, but other file systems can be a good option too.

the 3 CX300's we have are all dogs, 45megs/sec across 10disk RAID5, and only 111 or so across a 20 disk metalun (2x10disk RAID 10s) The CX500 has 'near-line' performance with 16disk raid 10's

Oh yeah EMC.. and your support BLOWS! My next array will be Hitachi! BTW, has had good results with local SAS drives, hoping the dell MD3000 we just got will blow away any low-to-midrage EMC (6disk RAID10 was going at 150megs sec)

There are all sequential writes, btw.
.......
We run Oracle 9iR2,10gR1/2 on RH4/RH3 and Solaris 10 (Sparc) remove NSPAM to email Received on Thu May 24 2007 - 03:02:55 CDT