 physical layout [message #127209] |
Sat, 09 July 2005 23:20  |
NotaDBA
Messages: 6
Registered: July 2005
Location: Richmond, VA
|
Junior Member |
|
|
What if i place two datafiles on same disk?
What if i place a data file and an index file on the same disk?
What are the problems that i may with this given scenario?
Disk 01 - Control file 1, Data1
Disk 02 - control file 2, Data2
Disk 03 - Data3, Data4
Disk 04 - Data5, Index1
TIA
NOTADBA
[Updated on: Sat, 09 July 2005 23:59] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: physical layout [message #127210 is a reply to message #127209] |
Sat, 09 July 2005 23:47  |
girish.rohini
Messages: 744
Registered: April 2005
Location: Delhi (India)
|
Senior Member |
|
|
NotaDBA wrote:
What if i place two datafiles on same disk?
What if i place a data file and an index file on the same disk?
What are the problems that i may with this given scenario?
Disk 01 - Control file 1, Data1
Disk 02 - control file 2, Data2
Disk 03 - Data3, Data4
Disk 04 - Data5, Index1
TIA
NOTADBA SO NOTADEVIL YET
**Datafile: file containing user data
**Indexfile: file containing user indexes
1. U can place 2 datafiles on same disks. But first decide on what data will be stored in those files. If that data has to be accessed simultaneously (most of the time) & in bulk, better to place these files on separate disk. This will balance the I/O on disks.
2. Ideally indexes should be placed on separate disks (if disks available). Place this alongwith any of the control files on disks.
3. Control file placement is OK.
4. NOTADBA SO NOTADEVIL YET
Hey, DBAs are not all that bad...
Regds
Girish
[EDIT]: minor typo
[Updated on: Sat, 09 July 2005 23:48] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: physical layout [message #127211 is a reply to message #127210] |
Sat, 09 July 2005 23:52 |
NotaDBA
Messages: 6
Registered: July 2005
Location: Richmond, VA
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Thanx for the reply. I didnt meant to hurt with that quote, if that sounds really in a derogatory way then i must apologise.
Thanks again for early reply.
Cheers
NOTADBA
|
|
|
|
| Re: physical layout [message #127405 is a reply to message #127209] |
Mon, 11 July 2005 09:47 |
smartin
Messages: 1803
Registered: March 2005
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
|
Senior Member |
|
|
|
Do you really have an environment with physically separate and individual disks? You don't have RAID or diskgroups going on?
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: physical layout [message #127469 is a reply to message #127209] |
Mon, 11 July 2005 16:09 |
smartin
Messages: 1803
Registered: March 2005
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Yikes, make sure you take good backups. And spread your redo log group members across multiple disks as you are doing with control files.
|
|
|
|
| Re: physical layout [message #127532 is a reply to message #127209] |
Tue, 12 July 2005 01:52 |
Achchan
Messages: 86
Registered: June 2005
|
Member |
|
|
Hi all,
I have seen this many times:The meaning of "disk" is fuzzy and diff people use to understand diff meanings from that.
Do you mean you have really 4 seperate HARD DISKS in your case?(Not RAID ofcourse)
Or you just have ONE HARD DISK and it has 4 seperate "Disk Drives" called c:,d:,E:,f: ? You should concern recovery issues when you put your control files and redo logs on just ONE HARD DISK.
-best wishes
|
|
|
|
| Re: physical layout [message #127586 is a reply to message #127209] |
Tue, 12 July 2005 07:32 |
smartin
Messages: 1803
Registered: March 2005
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Yeah, that is what I was trying to get at with my question to the OP. One disk is fine for a nice little sandbox development single user on your pc to test and figure things out with database. But "not a good idea" for the real deal.
|
|
|
|
] 
Blog
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
