Rainer Heilke wrote:
If you plan on RAC, then ASM makes good sense. It is
unclear (to me anyway)
if ASM over a zvol is better than ASM over a raw LUN.
Hmm. I thought ASM was really the _only_ effective way to do RAC,
but then, I'm not a DBA (and don't want to be ;-) We'll be just
using raw LUN's. While the zvol idea is interesting, the DBA's
are very particular about making sure the environment is set up
in a way Oracle will support (and not hang up when we have a problem).
ASM is relatively new technology. Traditionally, OPS and RAC were
built over raw devices, directly or as represented by cluster-aware
logical volume managers. DBAs tend to not like raw, so Sun Cluster
(Solaris Cluster) supports RAC over QFS which is a very good solution.
Some Sun Cluster customers run RAC over NFS, which also works
surprisingly well.
Meanwhile, Oracle continues to develop ASM to appease the DBAs who
want filesystem-like solutions. IMHO, in the long run, Oracle will
transition many customers to ASM and this means that it probably
isn't worth the effort to make a file system be the best for Oracle,
at the expense of other features and workloads.
-- richard
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
