Re: Q: Filesystem choice for log_archive_dest

It's a very busy critical production system. When we saw the "cannot allocate new log" messages, we increased the redo logs from 8x256Mb to 16x256Mb and the messages disappeared. But our analysis was: the only thing changed was the direct IO activation, we've never had this problems before, the load appeared to be the same(it's hard to measure, it's a mobile phone company with all those SMS services). So now I'm trying to find the technical explanation of why one could need a direct IO filesystem for the archived log files.
And there is another thing, that made me post the question: yesterday we had to run a report query from sqlplus and guess what: the first person ran the report spooling under the OFA's filesystem, the result was ORA-01555 after 3h! And the second, me, ran the same query(same execution plan!) spooling on the host's local filesystem - successfully in 15min ... So, we ran another test today with another query, the results: spooling on the direct IO filesystem: 30min, on the local filesystem: 49s.

Thanks
Dimitre

• Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Closson" <kevinc_at_polyserve.com> To: <oracle-l_at_freelists.org> Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2005 6:21 PM Subject: RE: Q: Filesystem choice for log_archive_dest

>
> >So I was wondering, could the direct IO be beneficial for the
> log_archive_dest filesystem in some cases?
>
> yep...see my last post. This just needs tuning. how many
> online logs do you have and what size are they?
>
> --
> http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l