Re: Oracle & SAN Experiences?
Some observations based on experience. Allocating storage based on the controllers helps if the database is large enough. e.g. 1 controller manages 100G of physical disk. Use that as a mount point. This does improve io somewhat if you can have mount points in 100G multiples (or whatever your controller manages). On board caching can be a problem. Oracle writes to disk but the data actually gets cached rather than physically written to disk. If a database crashes before the actual write to disk occurs you lose the data. Write through caching helps this but offer no guarantees. We found that approximately 60% of our io was actually from the cache rather than disk. The cache lru was holding the data blocks. This made the reads much faster. --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > The Sys. Admin. team wants to consolidate storage > (and > > probably get a new toy too) on all of our servers, > so they > > are evaluating a SAN (LSI Logic E4600). The DBA > team is > > doing some research to determine the pros and cons > of > > doing this, and I'd like to hear any of your > experiences > > (good and bad) using SAN with Oracle. > > > > My understanding is that all of our database > servers would > > remain intact, but the attached disk storage would > move > > into the SAN. So, we still have the Production, > Test, and > > App. servers with their processors and memory, > Oracle > > homes, etc. The SAN will hold database files from > > Production, Test, Apps., staging, ODS,data > warehouse, etc. > > > > Their arguments: > > -the SAN is very scalable (500 GB - 40 TB) > > -easy to manage disks in one central location > > -fancy statistics collection on all SAN disks > > -much higher throughput on the fiber SAN > connections than > > with locally attached disk arrays > > -capable of using mixed RAID levels (0, 1, 1+0, 5, > etc.) > > -can partition sets of disks in the SAN for > specific > > server access -Snapshot backup capability is very > fast in > > the SAN (much faster than traditional Oracle > backups) > > > > DBA arguments: > > -How will this affect database performance? > > -What are the drawbacks, if any, with the > pre-fetch of > > data performed by the SAN (i.e., SAN cache) > > -How tunable is the SAN > > -Fast, small disks are better for performance and > less > > wasted space than the typical huge disks in a SAN > (it's > > possible to use smaller disks in the SAN) -Prove > it! > > > > > > After reading the "Sane SAN" article and a case > study > > about Volvo implementing a SAN, I believe it's > possible to > > have a great Oracle/SAN implementation if it's > setup > > correctly and tuned. Other resources that you can > Google > > are "Using SVA SnapShot with Oracle", "Performance > > Benchmark LSI Logic E4600 (STK D178)", "SAN > Storage for > > Open Systems Environments", and of course check > the > > OraFaq. > > > > Thanks for sharing, > > > > David Wagoner > > Oracle DBA > > Sounds like you're going through an excellent > evaluation > process. I would suggest to keep in mind Anjo's > advice to > also regard I/O in terms of units of throughput > (i.e. read > or write rates) instead of Gbytes or Tbytes (i.e. > static > capacity). Helps clarify the discussions... > > The other thing is the idea of co-mingling > production and > dev/test. Of course it is possible and quite > feasible, but > if you look at things from the perspective of units > of > throughput, you might find a huge disparity or > conflict. > Perhaps the most telling indicator might be > reviewing > whether or not your LANs for production and dev/test > are > isolated from one another -- many of the rationales > for > doing so (or not doing so) might be similar to the > considerations for your SAN. > > Good luck! > -- > Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: > http://www.orafaq.com > -- > Author: > INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Fat City Network Services-- 858-538-5051 > http://www.fatcity.com > San Diego, California-- Mailing list and web > hosting services > - > To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an > E-Mail message > to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of > 'ListGuru') and in > the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB > ORACLE-L > (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed > from). You may > also send the HELP command for other information > (like subscribing). = Pete Barnett Lead Database Administrator The Regence Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your site http://webhosting.yahoo.com -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Peter Barnett INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services-- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com San Diego, California-- Mailing list and web hosting services -
RE: Oracle & SAN Experiences?
Title: The Sys Hi there What are the thoughts about the Xiotech - Magnitude. George George Leonard Oracle Database Administrator Dimension Data (Pty) Ltd (Reg. No. 1987/006597/07) Tel: (+27 11) 575 0573 Fax: (+27 11) 576 0573 E-mail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.didata.co.za You Have The Obligation to Inform One Honestly of the risk, And As a Person You Are Committed to Educate Yourself to the Total Risk In Any Activity! Once Informed & Totally Aware of the Risk, Every Fool Has the Right to Kill or Injure Themselves as They See Fit! -Original Message- From: Babette Turner-Underwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 11 November 2002 15:29 PM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Subject: RE: Oracle & SAN Experiences? A client site that I was supporting a while ago had big problems with their NAS. While doing Oracle backups to tape, the application would drop connections. In a SAN environment, there might also be similar problems. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of David Wagoner Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 9:59 AM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Subject: Oracle & SAN Experiences? The Sys. Admin. team wants to consolidate storage (and probably get a new toy too) on all of our servers, so they are evaluating a SAN (LSI Logic E4600). The DBA team is doing some research to determine the pros and cons of doing this, and I'd like to hear any of your experiences (good and bad) using SAN with Oracle. My understanding is that all of our database servers would remain intact, but the attached disk storage would move into the SAN. So, we still have the Production, Test, and App. servers with their processors and memory, Oracle homes, etc. The SAN will hold database files from Production, Test, Apps., staging, ODS,data warehouse, etc. Their arguments: -the SAN is very scalable (500 GB - 40 TB) -easy to manage disks in one central location -fancy statistics collection on all SAN disks -much higher throughput on the fiber SAN connections than with locally attached disk arrays -capable of using mixed RAID levels (0, 1, 1+0, 5, etc.) -can partition sets of disks in the SAN for specific server access -Snapshot backup capability is very fast in the SAN (much faster than traditional Oracle backups) DBA arguments: -How will this affect database performance? -What are the drawbacks, if any, with the pre-fetch of data performed by the SAN (i.e., SAN cache) -How tunable is the SAN -Fast, small disks are better for performance and less wasted space than the typical huge disks in a SAN (it's possible to use smaller disks in the SAN) -Prove it! After reading the "Sane SAN" article and a case study about Volvo implementing a SAN, I believe it's possible to have a great Oracle/SAN implementation if it's setup correctly and tuned. Other resources that you can Google are "Using SVA SnapShot with Oracle", "Performance Benchmark LSI Logic E4600 (STK D178)", "SAN Storage for Open Systems Environments", and of course check the OraFaq. Thanks for sharing, David Wagoner Oracle DBA
RE: Oracle & SAN Experiences?
James, Thanks for the tips. I’ve read your Sane SAN article several times and think it’s excellent. I’ll check out the other article too. Best regards, David Wagoner Oracle DBA Cary, NC -Original Message- From: James Morle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 8:28 AM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Subject: RE: Oracle & SAN Experiences? David, You might find one of my whitepapers interesting: Sane SAN is the title. You can get it at: www.scaleabilities.com/whitepapers.shtml www.oaktable.net Also, you will find a paper on integrating solid state disks into a SAN, and whether that makes any sense to real sites or not. Best regards James -- James Morle Author of "Scaling Oracle8i: Building Highly Scalable OLTP System Architectures"
RE: Oracle & SAN Experiences?
David, You might find one of my whitepapers interesting: Sane SAN is the title. You can get it at: www.scaleabilities.com/whitepapers.shtml www.oaktable.net Also, you will find a paper on integrating solid state disks into a SAN, and whether that makes any sense to real sites or not. Best regards James -- James Morle Author of "Scaling Oracle8i: Building Highly Scalable OLTP System Architectures"
RE: Oracle & SAN Experiences?
Babette - Sounds like a problem I wrestled with for a long time. Turns out that RMAN opens quite a few connections and the NAS isn't usually set up for that many connections. Of course, instead of an error message, it just hangs. Dennis Williams DBA, 40%OCP Lifetouch, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 9:29 AM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L A client site that I was supporting a while ago had big problems with their NAS. While doing Oracle backups to tape, the application would drop connections. In a SAN environment, there might also be similar problems. -Original Message- Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 9:59 AM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L The Sys. Admin. team wants to consolidate storage (and probably get a new toy too) on all of our servers, so they are evaluating a SAN (LSI Logic E4600). The DBA team is doing some research to determine the pros and cons of doing this, and I'd like to hear any of your experiences (good and bad) using SAN with Oracle. My understanding is that all of our database servers would remain intact, but the attached disk storage would move into the SAN. So, we still have the Production, Test, and App. servers with their processors and memory, Oracle homes, etc. The SAN will hold database files from Production, Test, Apps., staging, ODS,data warehouse, etc. Their arguments: -the SAN is very scalable (500 GB - 40 TB) -easy to manage disks in one central location -fancy statistics collection on all SAN disks -much higher throughput on the fiber SAN connections than with locally attached disk arrays -capable of using mixed RAID levels (0, 1, 1+0, 5, etc.) -can partition sets of disks in the SAN for specific server access -Snapshot backup capability is very fast in the SAN (much faster than traditional Oracle backups) DBA arguments: -How will this affect database performance? -What are the drawbacks, if any, with the pre-fetch of data performed by the SAN (i.e., SAN cache) -How tunable is the SAN -Fast, small disks are better for performance and less wasted space than the typical huge disks in a SAN (it's possible to use smaller disks in the SAN) -Prove it! After reading the "Sane SAN" article and a case study about Volvo implementing a SAN, I believe it's possible to have a great Oracle/SAN implementation if it's setup correctly and tuned. Other resources that you can Google are "Using SVA SnapShot with Oracle", "Performance Benchmark LSI Logic E4600 (STK D178)", "SAN Storage for Open Systems Environments", and of course check the OraFaq. Thanks for sharing, David Wagoner Oracle DBA -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: DENNIS WILLIAMS INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services-- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com San Diego, California-- Mailing list and web hosting services - To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
RE: Oracle & SAN Experiences?
Title: The Sys A client site that I was supporting a while ago had big problems with their NAS. While doing Oracle backups to tape, the application would drop connections. In a SAN environment, there might also be similar problems. -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of David WagonerSent: Friday, November 08, 2002 9:59 AMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: Oracle & SAN Experiences? The Sys. Admin. team wants to consolidate storage (and probably get a new toy too) on all of our servers, so they are evaluating a SAN (LSI Logic E4600). The DBA team is doing some research to determine the pros and cons of doing this, and Id like to hear any of your experiences (good and bad) using SAN with Oracle. My understanding is that all of our database servers would remain intact, but the attached disk storage would move into the SAN. So, we still have the Production, Test, and App. servers with their processors and memory, Oracle homes, etc. The SAN will hold database files from Production, Test, Apps., staging, ODS,data warehouse, etc. Their arguments: -the SAN is very scalable (500 GB 40 TB) -easy to manage disks in one central location -fancy statistics collection on all SAN disks -much higher throughput on the fiber SAN connections than with locally attached disk arrays -capable of using mixed RAID levels (0, 1, 1+0, 5, etc.) -can partition sets of disks in the SAN for specific server access -Snapshot backup capability is very fast in the SAN (much faster than traditional Oracle backups) DBA arguments: -How will this affect database performance? -What are the drawbacks, if any, with the pre-fetch of data performed by the SAN (i.e., SAN cache) -How tunable is the SAN -Fast, small disks are better for performance and less wasted space than the typical huge disks in a SAN (its possible to use smaller disks in the SAN) -Prove it! After reading the Sane SAN article and a case study about Volvo implementing a SAN, I believe its possible to have a great Oracle/SAN implementation if its setup correctly and tuned. Other resources that you can Google are Using SVA SnapShot with Oracle, Performance Benchmark LSI Logic E4600 (STK D178), SAN Storage for Open Systems Environments, and of course check the OraFaq. Thanks for sharing, David Wagoner Oracle DBA
RE: Oracle & SAN Experiences?
Guess I wasn't clear with my earlier post. Here is the information from the SA's when confronted with the results of some I/O tests. Configuration on system 1 ( poor IO performance ): Large filesystem --> device driver --> hardware controller --> SAN switch --> SAN Server Configuration on system 2 ( better IO performance ): filesystem1 --> device driver -- | filesystem2 --> device driver --> hardware controller --> SAN switch --> SAN Server | filesystem3 --> device driver -- In configuration 1 the system was bottlenecked in the device driver, the SAN hardware was running fine. In configuration 2 the system was able to spread IO over multiple device drivers and gave better performance. Hope this clears things up. Might have been a deficiency in the volume manager software. Point I was trying to make was that when you switch to SAN storage you still have to be aware of the limitations of the host systems IO subsystems and look at tuning / configuration on both the SAN hardware and your host system. -Original Message- Sent: Saturday, November 09, 2002 3:19 PM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L It would be extremely surprising if there was a static relationship between the number of file-systems and the number of I/O controllers used by each. Sounds more like a mis-configuration, a mis-interpretation of the symptoms, or (most likely) a cover-up story to redirect blame. There is no awareness of controllers or other devices (other than logical volumes a.k.a. "raw" devices) in file-systems. This is a configuration issue for the SAN controller hardware/firmware/software, although I believe that the Veritas VxVM software can perform dynamic multi-pathing, so it could be performed at the LVM (logical volume manager) layer as well... Load-balancing and failover amongst I/O controller devices is common in SAN environments. It doesn't make sense to allow $200.00 controller cards to be either a bottleneck or a single-point-of-failure in an I/O subsystem costing millions of dollars... - Original Message - To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Sent: Saturday, November 09, 2002 12:33 PM One observation I have made at sites running SAN storage for Oracle is a tendency for the SA's to present the disk to the database server as a small number of large filesystems. On some OS platforms this can create a bottleneck on the host as all data to this large filesystem is routed through a single device driver. Solution is to present more filesystems and therefore have more channels from the OS perspective to access the disk. -Original Message- Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 6:59 AM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L The Sys. Admin. team wants to consolidate storage (and probably get a new toy too) on all of our servers, so they are evaluating a SAN (LSI Logic E4600). The DBA team is doing some research to determine the pros and cons of doing this, and Id like to hear any of your experiences (good and bad) using SAN with Oracle. My understanding is that all of our database servers would remain intact, but the attached disk storage would move into the SAN. So, we still have the Production, Test, and App. servers with their processors and memory, Oracle homes, etc. The SAN will hold database files from Production, Test, Apps., staging, ODS,data warehouse, etc. Their arguments: -the SAN is very scalable (500 GB 40 TB) -easy to manage disks in one central location -fancy statistics collection on all SAN disks -much higher throughput on the fiber SAN connections than with locally attached disk arrays -capable of using mixed RAID levels (0, 1, 1+0, 5, etc.) -can partition sets of disks in the SAN for specific server access -Snapshot backup capability is very fast in the SAN (much faster than traditional Oracle backups) DBA arguments: -How will this affect database performance? -What are the drawbacks, if any, with the pre-fetch of data performed by the SAN (i.e., SAN cache) -How tunable is the SAN -Fast, small disks are better for performance and less wasted space than the typical huge disks in a SAN (its possible to use smaller disks in the SAN) -Prove it! After reading the Sane SAN article and a case study about Volvo implementing a SAN, I believe its possible to have a great Oracle/SAN implementation if its setup correctly and tuned. Other resources that you can Google are Using SVA SnapShot with Oracle, Performance Benchmark LSI Logic E4600 (STK D178), SAN Storage for Open Systems Environments, and of course check the OraFaq. Thanks for sharing, David Wagoner Oracle DBA -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Mark Brooks INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services-- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com San Diego, California-- Mailing list and web hosting services --
Re: Oracle & SAN Experiences?
Title: The Sys
It would be extremely surprising if there was a
static relationship between the number of file-systems and the number of I/O
controllers used by each. Sounds more like a mis-configuration, a
mis-interpretation of the symptoms, or (most likely) a cover-up story to
redirect blame.
There is no awareness of controllers or other
devices (other than logical volumes a.k.a. "raw" devices) in
file-systems. This is a configuration issue for the SAN
controller hardware/firmware/software, although I believe that the Veritas VxVM
software can perform dynamic multi-pathing, so it could be performed at the LVM
(logical volume manager) layer as well...
Load-balancing and failover amongst I/O controller
devices is common in SAN environments. It doesn't make sense to allow
$200.00 controller cards to be either a bottleneck or a
single-point-of-failure in an I/O subsystem costing millions of
dollars...
- Original Message -
From:
Mark
Brooks
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Sent: Saturday, November 09, 2002 12:33
PM
Subject: RE: Oracle & SAN
Experiences?
One observation I have made at sites running SAN storage for Oracle is
a tendency for the SA's to present the disk to the database server as a small
number of large filesystems. On some OS platforms this can create a bottleneck
on the host as all data to this large filesystem is routed through a single
device driver. Solution is to present more filesystems and therefore have more
channels from the OS perspective to access the disk.
-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of David WagonerSent:
Friday, November 08, 2002 6:59 AMTo: Multiple recipients of list
ORACLE-LSubject: Oracle & SAN
Experiences?
The
Sys. Admin. team wants to consolidate storage (and probably get a new toy
too) on all of our servers, so they are evaluating a SAN (LSI Logic E4600). The DBA team is doing some research
to determine the pros and cons of doing this, and Id like to hear any of
your experiences (good and bad) using SAN with
Oracle.
My
understanding is that all of our database servers would remain intact, but
the attached disk storage would move into the SAN. So, we still have the Production,
Test, and App. servers with their processors and memory, Oracle homes,
etc. The SAN will hold database
files from Production, Test, Apps., staging, ODS,data warehouse,
etc.
Their
arguments:
-the
SAN is very scalable (500 GB 40 TB)
-easy
to manage disks in one central location
-fancy
statistics collection on all SAN disks
-much
higher throughput on the fiber SAN connections than with locally attached
disk arrays
-capable
of using mixed RAID levels (0, 1, 1+0, 5,
etc.)
-can
partition sets of disks in the SAN for specific server
access
-Snapshot
backup capability is very fast in the SAN (much faster than traditional
Oracle backups)
DBA
arguments:
-How
will this affect database performance?
-What
are the drawbacks, if any, with the pre-fetch of data performed by the SAN
(i.e., SAN cache)
-How
tunable is the SAN
-Fast,
small disks are better for performance and less wasted space than the
typical huge disks in a SAN (its possible to use smaller disks in the
SAN)
-Prove
it!
After
reading the Sane SAN article and a case study about Volvo implementing a
SAN, I believe its possible to have a great Oracle/SAN implementation if
its setup correctly and tuned.
Other resources that you can Google are Using SVA SnapShot with
Oracle, Performance Benchmark LSI Logic E4600 (STK D178), SAN Storage
for Open Systems Environments, and of course check the
OraFaq.
Thanks
for sharing,
David
Wagoner
Oracle
DBA
RE: Oracle & SAN Experiences?
Title: The Sys One observation I have made at sites running SAN storage for Oracle is a tendency for the SA's to present the disk to the database server as a small number of large filesystems. On some OS platforms this can create a bottleneck on the host as all data to this large filesystem is routed through a single device driver. Solution is to present more filesystems and therefore have more channels from the OS perspective to access the disk. -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of David WagonerSent: Friday, November 08, 2002 6:59 AMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: Oracle & SAN Experiences? The Sys. Admin. team wants to consolidate storage (and probably get a new toy too) on all of our servers, so they are evaluating a SAN (LSI Logic E4600). The DBA team is doing some research to determine the pros and cons of doing this, and Id like to hear any of your experiences (good and bad) using SAN with Oracle. My understanding is that all of our database servers would remain intact, but the attached disk storage would move into the SAN. So, we still have the Production, Test, and App. servers with their processors and memory, Oracle homes, etc. The SAN will hold database files from Production, Test, Apps., staging, ODS,data warehouse, etc. Their arguments: -the SAN is very scalable (500 GB 40 TB) -easy to manage disks in one central location -fancy statistics collection on all SAN disks -much higher throughput on the fiber SAN connections than with locally attached disk arrays -capable of using mixed RAID levels (0, 1, 1+0, 5, etc.) -can partition sets of disks in the SAN for specific server access -Snapshot backup capability is very fast in the SAN (much faster than traditional Oracle backups) DBA arguments: -How will this affect database performance? -What are the drawbacks, if any, with the pre-fetch of data performed by the SAN (i.e., SAN cache) -How tunable is the SAN -Fast, small disks are better for performance and less wasted space than the typical huge disks in a SAN (its possible to use smaller disks in the SAN) -Prove it! After reading the Sane SAN article and a case study about Volvo implementing a SAN, I believe its possible to have a great Oracle/SAN implementation if its setup correctly and tuned. Other resources that you can Google are Using SVA SnapShot with Oracle, Performance Benchmark LSI Logic E4600 (STK D178), SAN Storage for Open Systems Environments, and of course check the OraFaq. Thanks for sharing, David Wagoner Oracle DBA
Re: Oracle & SAN Experiences?
Tim, Of course, there are excellent arguments for having test and development environments on the same SAN. With SAP for example, wholesale refreshes of the test and dev environments periodically take place. These are refreshed from production. Having these on the same SAN can make a huge difference in the performance of these. Jared On Friday 08 November 2002 07:59, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > The Sys. Admin. team wants to consolidate storage (and > > probably get a new toy too) on all of our servers, so they > > are evaluating a SAN (LSI Logic E4600). The DBA team is > > doing some research to determine the pros and cons of > > doing this, and I'd like to hear any of your experiences > > (good and bad) using SAN with Oracle. > > > > My understanding is that all of our database servers would > > remain intact, but the attached disk storage would move > > into the SAN. So, we still have the Production, Test, and > > App. servers with their processors and memory, Oracle > > homes, etc. The SAN will hold database files from > > Production, Test, Apps., staging, ODS,data warehouse, etc. > > > > Their arguments: > > -the SAN is very scalable (500 GB - 40 TB) > > -easy to manage disks in one central location > > -fancy statistics collection on all SAN disks > > -much higher throughput on the fiber SAN connections than > > with locally attached disk arrays > > -capable of using mixed RAID levels (0, 1, 1+0, 5, etc.) > > -can partition sets of disks in the SAN for specific > > server access -Snapshot backup capability is very fast in > > the SAN (much faster than traditional Oracle backups) > > > > DBA arguments: > > -How will this affect database performance? > > -What are the drawbacks, if any, with the pre-fetch of > > data performed by the SAN (i.e., SAN cache) > > -How tunable is the SAN > > -Fast, small disks are better for performance and less > > wasted space than the typical huge disks in a SAN (it's > > possible to use smaller disks in the SAN) -Prove it! > > > > > > After reading the "Sane SAN" article and a case study > > about Volvo implementing a SAN, I believe it's possible to > > have a great Oracle/SAN implementation if it's setup > > correctly and tuned. Other resources that you can Google > > are "Using SVA SnapShot with Oracle", "Performance > > Benchmark LSI Logic E4600 (STK D178)", "SAN Storage for > > Open Systems Environments", and of course check the > > OraFaq. > > > > Thanks for sharing, > > > > David Wagoner > > Oracle DBA > > Sounds like you're going through an excellent evaluation > process. I would suggest to keep in mind Anjo's advice to > also regard I/O in terms of units of throughput (i.e. read > or write rates) instead of Gbytes or Tbytes (i.e. static > capacity). Helps clarify the discussions... > > The other thing is the idea of co-mingling production and > dev/test. Of course it is possible and quite feasible, but > if you look at things from the perspective of units of > throughput, you might find a huge disparity or conflict. > Perhaps the most telling indicator might be reviewing > whether or not your LANs for production and dev/test are > isolated from one another -- many of the rationales for > doing so (or not doing so) might be similar to the > considerations for your SAN. > > Good luck! -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Jared Still INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services-- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com San Diego, California-- Mailing list and web hosting services - To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
Re: Oracle & SAN Experiences?
I am off today, recuperating from a SAN failure earlier this week. Here is a very short take: our Dell SAN went down (backplane failure), taking ALL of databases along with it. This meant that all servers attached to this SAN were offline. Upon Dell "repairing" the SAN, data on one volume (mapped to production server) was corrupted and I had to restore from tape and apply a week's worth of archived logs. Time it took Dell to fix their hardware? 48 hours. We also have a new EMC Sym, and are considering abandoning SAN approach and putting all eggs into Sym, since EMC guys at least monitor their hardware and would've known of such failure prior to it occurring. Am I saying SANs are bad? No. But do consider your vendor, support level, and required reliability. Gary - Original Message - To: "Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 9:58 AM > The Sys. Admin. team wants to consolidate storage (and probably get a new > toy too) on all of our servers, so they are evaluating a SAN (LSI Logic > E4600). The DBA team is doing some research to determine the pros and cons > of doing this, and I'd like to hear any of your experiences (good and bad) > using SAN with Oracle. > > My understanding is that all of our database servers would remain intact, > but the attached disk storage would move into the SAN. So, we still have > the Production, Test, and App. servers with their processors and memory, > Oracle homes, etc. The SAN will hold database files from Production, Test, > Apps., staging, ODS,data warehouse, etc. > > Their arguments: > -the SAN is very scalable (500 GB - 40 TB) > -easy to manage disks in one central location > -fancy statistics collection on all SAN disks > -much higher throughput on the fiber SAN connections than with locally > attached disk arrays > -capable of using mixed RAID levels (0, 1, 1+0, 5, etc.) > -can partition sets of disks in the SAN for specific server access > -Snapshot backup capability is very fast in the SAN (much faster than > traditional Oracle backups) > > DBA arguments: > -How will this affect database performance? > -What are the drawbacks, if any, with the pre-fetch of data performed by the > SAN (i.e., SAN cache) > -How tunable is the SAN > -Fast, small disks are better for performance and less wasted space than the > typical huge disks in a SAN (it's possible to use smaller disks in the SAN) > -Prove it! > > > After reading the "Sane SAN" article and a case study about Volvo > implementing a SAN, I believe it's possible to have a great Oracle/SAN > implementation if it's setup correctly and tuned. Other resources that you > can Google are "Using SVA SnapShot with Oracle", "Performance Benchmark LSI > Logic E4600 (STK D178)", "SAN Storage for Open Systems Environments", and of > course check the OraFaq. > > Thanks for sharing, > > David Wagoner > Oracle DBA > > > > > -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Gary Weber INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services-- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com San Diego, California-- Mailing list and web hosting services - To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
Re: Oracle & SAN Experiences?
> The Sys. Admin. team wants to consolidate storage (and > probably get a new toy too) on all of our servers, so they > are evaluating a SAN (LSI Logic E4600). The DBA team is > doing some research to determine the pros and cons of > doing this, and I'd like to hear any of your experiences > (good and bad) using SAN with Oracle. > > My understanding is that all of our database servers would > remain intact, but the attached disk storage would move > into the SAN. So, we still have the Production, Test, and > App. servers with their processors and memory, Oracle > homes, etc. The SAN will hold database files from > Production, Test, Apps., staging, ODS,data warehouse, etc. > > Their arguments: > -the SAN is very scalable (500 GB - 40 TB) > -easy to manage disks in one central location > -fancy statistics collection on all SAN disks > -much higher throughput on the fiber SAN connections than > with locally attached disk arrays > -capable of using mixed RAID levels (0, 1, 1+0, 5, etc.) > -can partition sets of disks in the SAN for specific > server access -Snapshot backup capability is very fast in > the SAN (much faster than traditional Oracle backups) > > DBA arguments: > -How will this affect database performance? > -What are the drawbacks, if any, with the pre-fetch of > data performed by the SAN (i.e., SAN cache) > -How tunable is the SAN > -Fast, small disks are better for performance and less > wasted space than the typical huge disks in a SAN (it's > possible to use smaller disks in the SAN) -Prove it! > > > After reading the "Sane SAN" article and a case study > about Volvo implementing a SAN, I believe it's possible to > have a great Oracle/SAN implementation if it's setup > correctly and tuned. Other resources that you can Google > are "Using SVA SnapShot with Oracle", "Performance > Benchmark LSI Logic E4600 (STK D178)", "SAN Storage for > Open Systems Environments", and of course check the > OraFaq. > > Thanks for sharing, > > David Wagoner > Oracle DBA Sounds like you're going through an excellent evaluation process. I would suggest to keep in mind Anjo's advice to also regard I/O in terms of units of throughput (i.e. read or write rates) instead of Gbytes or Tbytes (i.e. static capacity). Helps clarify the discussions... The other thing is the idea of co-mingling production and dev/test. Of course it is possible and quite feasible, but if you look at things from the perspective of units of throughput, you might find a huge disparity or conflict. Perhaps the most telling indicator might be reviewing whether or not your LANs for production and dev/test are isolated from one another -- many of the rationales for doing so (or not doing so) might be similar to the considerations for your SAN. Good luck! -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services-- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com San Diego, California-- Mailing list and web hosting services - To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
Oracle & SAN Experiences?
Title: The Sys The Sys. Admin. team wants to consolidate storage (and probably get a new toy too) on all of our servers, so they are evaluating a SAN (LSI Logic E4600). The DBA team is doing some research to determine the pros and cons of doing this, and I’d like to hear any of your experiences (good and bad) using SAN with Oracle. My understanding is that all of our database servers would remain intact, but the attached disk storage would move into the SAN. So, we still have the Production, Test, and App. servers with their processors and memory, Oracle homes, etc. The SAN will hold database files from Production, Test, Apps., staging, ODS,data warehouse, etc. Their arguments: -the SAN is very scalable (500 GB – 40 TB) -easy to manage disks in one central location -fancy statistics collection on all SAN disks -much higher throughput on the fiber SAN connections than with locally attached disk arrays -capable of using mixed RAID levels (0, 1, 1+0, 5, etc.) -can partition sets of disks in the SAN for specific server access -Snapshot backup capability is very fast in the SAN (much faster than traditional Oracle backups) DBA arguments: -How will this affect database performance? -What are the drawbacks, if any, with the pre-fetch of data performed by the SAN (i.e., SAN cache) -How tunable is the SAN -Fast, small disks are better for performance and less wasted space than the typical huge disks in a SAN (it’s possible to use smaller disks in the SAN) -Prove it! After reading the “Sane SAN” article and a case study about Volvo implementing a SAN, I believe it’s possible to have a great Oracle/SAN implementation if it’s setup correctly and tuned. Other resources that you can Google are “Using SVA SnapShot with Oracle”, “Performance Benchmark LSI Logic E4600 (STK D178)”, “SAN Storage for Open Systems Environments”, and of course check the OraFaq. Thanks for sharing, David Wagoner Oracle DBA
