Re: Still looking for RAID answers

Thanks, I knew I had seen that "eliminates ORA-1555" lie somewhere official, but couldn't find it online
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.databases.oracle.server/msg/206360055377d1b2?dmode=source http://metalink.oracle.com/metalink/plsql/ml2_documents.showFrameDocument?p_database_id=NOT&p_id=269814.1

SAME can help minimize cost by reducing compulsive tuning disorder, especially in a situation where people have ridiculous timeframes like "it has to be done tomorrow," but it is not necessarily the best practice. And there are other things in that slide presentation that sort of don't really present the downsides of features like flashback and undo. Basically, you will need a lot of disk in your undo area, depending on how much of those features you intend to use. And any new features introduced in 9 may not work totally "best" until 10. Likewise any new features introduced in 10.

Anyways, I think SAME is appropriate for smaller sites, given the qualifier about log placement. Unfortunately, some use SAME to justify RAID-5. jg

--
@home.com is bogus.
So what if metabolife's existence is threatened?  Put the assets in
trust for the litigants.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050105/news_1n5ephedra.html