Re: Oracle 10g (ASM vs Veritas Clustered FS)

From: DA Morgan <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 15:31:46 -0800
Message-ID: <41d33d55$1_1@127.0.0.1>

jeff_vosburg_at_aliases.com wrote:

> In comp.databases.oracle.server Howard J. Rogers <hjr_at_dizwell.com> wrote:
>
>

>>I can't answer your actual question, because I'm not overly familiar 
>>with the Veritas option. But 'only using RAW' and 'depending entirely on 
>>RMAN for backups/restoress' don't strike me as major drawbacks. Quite 
>>the contrary. :-)

>
>
> I'm not a DBA, just trying to help one out. We don't use rman much,
> and generally rely on cold backups. I know, everywhere else people
> seem to use RMAN, our DBA's are slow like that :)
>
> As a sysadmin I'm not big on raw volumes but unfortunately our standards
> are pretty loose in this area.
>
>

>>Bear in mind that ASM is a good deal more than 'friendly raw'. The data 
>>redundancy features alone are worth having in my book.

>
>
> Yeah, from what I can see...ASM has a lot of nice features but everything
> we have goes on EMC DMX's and Veritas also offers similar solutions.
>
> At least, from what I can see (hence my posting).

There is a lot of value in ASM. Balancing i/o load when new volumes are added or volumes are removed being you should consider: Veritas can't touch it.

But our DBAs should be using RMAN and if they are not management should consider finding some new DBAs.

-- 
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)

Received on Wed Dec 29 2004 - 17:31:46 CST