No. I/O capacity is basically proportional to the number of spindles you can have working in parallel for you at any one time.
Thanks, Bjørn. On Tuesday 19 March 2002 20:58, Jenkins, Michael - EDS wrote: > Doesn't "creative" striping solve this problem to some extent? > > -----Original Message----- > Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 12:24 PM > To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L > > > This highlights problems with those larger drives... DBA's want more, > smaller drives in order to spread I/O and reduce contention but SA's want > fewer, larger drives in order to reduce expenses and ease administration. I > once fought a major battle demanding smaller 4GB drives because the same > amount of storage with the larger 9GB drives took away my ability to spread > I/O and segregate contending files. After winning the battle they went > ahead and bought the number of spindles I required but with the 9GB drives > because the incremental cost was only another $100 per drive. So I got the > number spindles I needed and a lot more storage capacity than was necessary > but it was OK to "waste" space in order to gain performance. > > Large drives dedicated to redo logs can also be tempting for S/A's. They > see all that extra space and figure it's a good place to put their > monitoring utilities and system log files the look at you quizically when > you explain that's why the database just slowed down. Then they walk away > complaining how Oracle is so "wasteful" of disk space. > > Larger, fewer drives are NOT necessarily cheaper if you try to make up for > I/O degredation by throwing CPU's and memory at the system. > > Storage may be cheaper on a $'s/GB basis but it still takes a lot to > engineer optimum I/O throughput. > > > Still wishing I has some 2GB SCSI drives... :-) > Steve Orr > > > -----Original Message----- > Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 8:13 AM > To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L > > > Wouldn't it be cheaper just to replace each drive with a bigger one rather > than buying all of the infrastructure related stuff? If you replace 8gb > drives with 80gb drives you just saved 9 cabinets. > > -----Original Message----- > Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 9:08 AM > To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L > > > I beg to differ. > > Each disk cost the disk price + 1/24 of the infrastructure costs. > > Yechiel Adar, Mehish Computer Services > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Stahlke, Mark [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Mon, March 18, 2002 10:33 PM > > To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L > > Subject: RE: Disk is cheap? > > > > Robert G. Freeman - Oracle8i OCP wrote: > > > But disk is cheap, right...? > > > Or is that yet another Urban Legend??? > > > > Yes, that's another Urban Legend. > > > > Disk DRIVES are cheap, disk SPACE is not so cheap. > > > > Consider this example: I have a disk cabinet with 24 slots and 23 > > disks. The 24th disk is cheap, but how much does the 25th disk cost? In > > addition to the disk drive we need a cabinet, controllers, cache, host > > adapters, cables, floor space, environmental controls, installation, > > configuration, management, maintenance contract, and on and on. > > > > Mark Stahlke > > Oracle DuhBA > > Denver Newspaper Agency -- Bjørn Engsig, Miracle A/S http://MiracleAS.dk -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: =?iso-8859-1?q?Bj=F8rn=20Engsig?= INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services -- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051 San Diego, California -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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).
