RE: RAC and ASM disk layout

        If anybody wants all the bugs out of a product (in this case ASM) before using it, then let's throw all our softs out the window. If you look at any patchset (10gR1 or 10gR2), how many patches you find for ASM, compared to, let's say, CBO? and every body uses CBO.

... all software has bugs. Not all bugs are created equal. Some are bourne
out of architecture...some are errant pointers... judge according to your conscience.

        Another point about performance: Netapps say that if you use ASM with iSCSI configuration to go to their disks, it's faster than using NAS (NFS mount the disks). They did the tests, not me. So, if you can live with it, ASM is the way to go.

...bwahahahaha..that is likely because iSCSI is a lighter protocol than NFS. I
also suspect that the NVRAM might not be active when a filer is an iSCSI target (somebody in the know please corect me on that point). In general,
however, iSCSI from a Netapp filer is a really weird situation. I know very few people on this list care about such subtleties, and thus very few
realize that the way NetApp presents an iSCSI target is as follows. The data is stored in blocks in disk, the disks are grouped and managed in volumes,
the volumes have a WAFL filesysem with files in it. The Filer presents the files as blocks via the iSCSI protocol...hmmm..

block->volume->filesystem->block->iSCSI

yippie

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