Re: FileSystem (Volume) Sizes and Names (questions)

The latest systems for which I have specified database storage have volume sizes of 350G and 1.3 TB, both created as striped and mirrored (SAME).

Jared

On 5/25/06, Hemant K Chitale <hkchital_at_singnet.com.sg> wrote:
>
>
> A quick survey.
>
> When you, as the DBA, are allowed to specify to the Storage team the
> filesystem (volume)
> sizes you want for Databases, what standards do you use ?
> eg for a database of less than 100GB, volumes of 10GB to 20GB each
> for a database of 100GB to 1TB, volumes of 100GB or 200GB each ....
>
> If the Storage team set's up default volumes [without referring to you]
> what sizes do they
> give you ?
>
> I would like "smaller" volumes [eg each mount point between 10% to 20% of
> the total size,
> thus 5 to 10 mount points] for the database files [of course, still using
> some standard
> sizes, eg 20GB [for the 100GB databases] across servers. This allows
> flexibility
> in relocating datafiles etc.
>
> If the underlying storage actually creates one large Mega-LUN, do you
> still care
> about the sizes of the mount points.
>
> As an additional question, do you standardize mount-point names ?
> eg /orasys for the RDBMS binaries
> /oradata1 ... /oradata10 for the database files
> /redo for the Redo Logs
> /archlogs for the ArchiveLogs
>
>

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