Re: A DBA philosopical question

Bob Jones wrote:

>>>If RAID 5 is all that bad, why is it so widely used and supported?
>>
>>If windows is all bad, why is it so widely used and supported?
>>

> I didn't know Windows was possibly considered all bad.

As a server platform or for home use to play games and surf the web. This is c.d.o.oracle.

>>RAID 5 is not bad just as fire is not bad ... when used appropriate.
>>

> That can be said just about any RAID.

No it can't.

>>Except with Apple's Xserve RAID units with their dual XOR engines ...

> 
> I have used it on HP, Dell, EMC and even old IBM hardware. They all work 
> great.

Hardly. You just didn't put in the work necessary, testing different configurations, to see how much better thru-put you could have had.

>>RAID5 dose not belong under an Oracle database.
>
> Now, that just sounds absurd.

Tell that to Oracle. Tell that to the people in my lab whose testing has repeatedly demonstrated this to be fact.

>>Why is it used so often
>>then? Because most UNIX system admins. don't ask their counterpart DBAs
>>what to do ... they just give them disk and say "make due with it."
>>--

> 
> You mean most sys admins automatically use RAID 5 without consulting DBAs? I 
> guess you have a reason for that too. 

Because they don't give a damn.

Sorry to be harsh but it is reality. At one very large telecom where I've consulted three different times for a period of several years there is a department that provides SA support. They give the DBA a box: Preconfigured: and say "use it." This is not unusual in large organizations.

-- 
Daniel A. Morgan
http://www.psoug.org
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace x with u to respond)