RE: raw vs cooked filesystem for Oracle

From: Kevin Closson <kevinc_at_polyserve.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 10:39:49 -0700
Message-ID: <5D2570CAFC98974F9B6A759D1C74BAD0E5AAFC@ex2.ms.polyserve.com>

anye filesystem that claims support for raw MUST do so with direct IO. If performance is not the same as RAW, don't buy it.    

---

        From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org] On Behalf Of Allen, Brandon

	Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2006 10:24 AM
	To: dc4oracle_at_yahoo.com; oracle-l_at_freelists.org
	Subject: RE: raw vs cooked filesystem for Oracle
	
	
	According to the below white paper, they were able to get

near-raw performance on AIX with the Concurrent I/O option:          

        http://www-03.ibm.com/servers/aix/whitepapers/db_perf_aix.pdf          

        I've also had good/excellent performance with concurrent I/O, but never compared it to raw so I can't really say how the two would stack up.                    

---

        From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org] On Behalf Of d cheng

        Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2006 10:11 AM                   

        I am writing a recommendation for one of my clients on using raw versus cooked filesystems for Oracle data files. Have you come across any recent documents regarding this topic?

        Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message or attachments hereto. Please advise immediately if you or your employer do not consent to Internet email for messages of this kind. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of this company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it.

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

Received on Thu Jul 20 2006 - 12:39:49 CDT