Re: HP-CFS versus ASM for RAC ?

BIG in all caps must really be BIG! :)

Personally I have a hard time finding a reason NOT to use ASM these days. ASM is an Oracle database filesystem written by Oracle database people for Oracle databases. The performance benefit of ASM comes from its striping. It is very difficult, and very time consuming to manually lay out datafiles and get the performance that ASM does. Before ASM, for each benchmark I used to spend one week with a storage admin, configuring luns, building filesystems and figuring out how to best lay out datafiles. Now with ASM, I spend half of a day and I'm done. That gives me 4.5 days to work on tuning SQL statements: a place where orders of magnatude of performance could exist.

WRT Question #2: If you use hardware RAID with external ASM redundancy, ASM will stripe over every lun in the diskgroup. IMO, this is the best configuration.

On 9/20/07, VIVEK_SHARMA <VIVEK_SHARMA_at_infosys.com> wrote:
>In order to take a Decision on doing a BIG Benchmark on HP Servers
with Oracle RAC.
>
> Qs 1 What are the pros & cons of using HP Serviceguard Cluster File System for Oracle RAC versus ASM-RAC?
>
> Number of Years in Production.
> Performance comparison
>
> Qs 2 With ASM, when using External Redundancy, does Striping from ASM anyways happen when presenting Multiple Disks from the External Storage?
>
> Hardware Config:-
>
> DB Servers HP-Itanium Dual Core Montecito – 80 CPUs
>
> Storage Box Model - XP24000
>
> Oracle 10gR2

-- 
Regards,

Greg Rahn
http://structureddata.org
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l