Re: Re: my initial storage division for SAN

rahul sharma,

		hi, but it is not performance reason, it is that you cannot mount the same volume on multiple hosts, unless you use NFS on another server, or use cluster filesystem, that is , you must split the volume into two volume and create seperate filesystem for seperate hosts.(oh, do you run the two instances on the same host? Then it is ok ).
		We use SAME here. We use Two FC switch and two T-3(1G/9*72GB/raid10). Performance is acceptable so far.

Regards
zhu chao
msn:chao_ping_at_163.com
www.cnoug.org(China Oracle User Group)

• 2003-04-27 23:11:00 ,you wrote：=======

>chao, my reason to let the archived logs from both the instances on one
>volume is that, instance B is not very
>busy, and i do not expect any kind of contection between arch processes of A
>& B using the same volume
>
>SAME is another concept which i have never tried.. i will go thru it also..
>thanks for reminding ;-))
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>To: "Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L" <ORACLE-L_at_fatcity.com>
>Sent: Monday, April 28, 2003 1:06 PM
>
>
>> rahul sharma,
>> hi, one question, 300GB to place archivelogs from a&b, they should be
>seperated , right? unless you use cluster filesystem, you cannot let the two
>node mount the same volume, right?
>> and maybe SAME rule works for you, consider it.And whether your system is
>write intensive, you can check it like:
>>
>> 13:08:50 perfstat_at_BIDDB.EACHNET.COM> @readwrite
>>
>> Total buffer
>> -------------
>> 1.6515E+10
>>
>> Elapsed: 00:00:00.48
>> old 2: :totalcost := &totalcost;
>> new 2: :totalcost := 1.6515E+10;
>>
>> PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
>>
>> Elapsed: 00:00:00.01
>>
>> total execution
>> ---------------
>> 1218693220
>>
>> Elapsed: 00:00:00.29
>> old 2: :totalexec :=&totalexec;
>> new 2: :totalexec :=1218693220;
>>
>> PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
>>
>> Elapsed: 00:00:00.02
>>
>> SQL_TYPE Total buffer total execution average Cost 成本比率
>执行比率
>> ---------- ------------- --------------- ------------ ---------- ---------
>-
>> BEGIN 2848457875 232752041 12.238165 17.24
>19.09
>> DECLA 218094451 6762742 32.2494117 1.32
>.55
>> DELET 47111763 1617433 29.1274897 .28
>.13
>> INSER 320604425 41939893 7.64437871 1.94
>3.44
>> SELEC 1.2343E+10 880118415 14.0239731 74.73
>72.21
>> UPDAT 737797721 55448104 13.3060947 4.46
>4.54
>>
>> column totalcost heading "Total buffer " new_value totalcost
>> select sum(buffer_gets) totalcost from v$sql;
>> variable totalcost number;
>>
>> begin
>> :totalcost := &totalcost;
>> end;
>> /
>>
>> col totalexec heading "total execution" new_value totalexec
>> select sum(executions) totalexec from v$sql;
>> variable totalexec number;
>> begin
>> :totalexec :=&totalexec;
>> end;
>> /
>>
>> select upper(substr(sql_text,1,5)) SQL_TYPE,sum(buffer_gets) TotalCost
>,sum(executions) TotalExec
>> ,sum(buffer_gets)/sum(executions) "average Cost",
>> trunc(Sum(buffer_gets)/(:totalcost),4)*100 "成本比率",
>> Trunc(sum(executions)/(:totalexec),4)*100 "执行比率"
>> from v$sql
>> group by upper(substr(sql_text,1,5))
>> having sum(buffer_gets)>100000;
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >we are in a process of migratin our instances to SAN, i have been given
>the
>> >task of
>> >dividing the SAN storage :-((
>> >
>> >here are my initial setup, we have been given a 1TB box ... please let me
>> >know if i am missing something
>> >
>> >(two instances A & B)
>> > - 36GB x 2 for redo logs 3 groups of two members each 500M size,
>> >multiplexed instance A
>> > - 36GB x 2 for redo logs 3 groups of two members each 500M size,
>> >multiplexed instance B
>> >- 300GB to hold archive logs from A & B , mirrored
>> >- 36GB drive for TEMP A & B
>> >
>> >the rest of the storage will be divided into DATA and INDEX for A & B ,
>my
>> >question is.. should we make
>> >RAID5 for data and index ?? or individual drives ? we know the IO
>patterns
>> >for all the tablespaces, ideally the write intensive tbs should be
>RAID(1+0)
>> >, but we might not have enough space if we do that. !! (have i answerd
>all
>> >my questions ??? ;-))
>> >
>> >i would appreciate any comments from you guys who have DB's running on
>SAN.
>> >
>> >TIA
>> >
>> >
>> >
>
>
>--
>Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
>--
>Author: rahul sharma
> INET: rahul_at_infotech.co.id
>
>Fat City Network Services -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com
>San Diego, California -- Mailing list and web hosting services
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
>to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
>the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
>(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may
>also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).

• = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: chao_ping
  INET: chao_ping_at_vip.163.com

Fat City Network Services    -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com
San Diego, California        -- Mailing list and web hosting services
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).