If you have the room, I would suggest doing a daily export of the
database until you get all the problems ironed out with Netbackup.
Especially if you are trying to do incremental backups. That way you
will at least have something to restore with if you find out your
Netbackup plan wasn't working.
Teresita,
You've gotten some good comments...even a quick tutorial on backups. My
recommendation to you (especially if you don't have any backups at all) is
that until you're more familiar with the tools you have that you should
initially avoid the complexities of incremental backups and immedi
You should get nightly cold
backups working first as it is the easiest. Then look into setting the database
to do archive logging.
Right now you don't have
any valid backups and if you crash and your DB fails to start you are
potentially screwed.
Also you should do a full
database export R
To do incremental backups of Oracle databases via NetBackup you need to
purchase the Veritas Agent for Oracle, which is an add-on to the NetBackup
client. Veritas charges for this component, per server. You have to hand
over more money to Veritas. This may not be an option at your site.
Without
I am from the old school, doesn't use RMAN, but soon will w/ our 9i
upgrades. I recommend to use RMAN if you are starting out and buy this
book.
http://www.bookpool.com/.x/dt3bpjmwz1/sm/0072226625
hth,
Gene>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/15/04 03:14AM
>>>Teresita Castro wrote:> > Hi!!> My
nam
Teresita Castro wrote:
Hi!!
My name is Tere Castro I am from Mexico I am not a DBA, I uses ORacle
just to make queries, funtions some updates and create indexes or
tables, that all.
Now I am in a little difficult situation, here we have a DBA that do not
have much experience. He has been wor
OK, Teresita, what is your question? Do you have MLM? Did you put the database in the
backup
mode? Did you save archives? How about the control files? Did you backup control
files? I doubt that
this forum is an appropriate place for a backup & recovery course, but it seems that
you have a good
Vordos, Suzy wrote:
A very long time ago, there was a whitepaper on implementing Veritas for Oracle systems. I think it was published by Veritas. I've googled and searched veritas.com and can't find it anywhere.
IIRC, one of the recommendations in the whitepaper was to not use rootdg for datab
Title: RE: Veritas and disks
This note may describe the behavior you are observing.
www.sun.com/blueprints/0400/ram-vxfs.pdf
HTH
Tony Aponte
-Original Message-
From: Freeman Robert - IL [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 3:34 PM
To: Multiple
True, true... :-)
That's what the "Health Assessment" is all about though.
Sort of a 10-30 page report of:
where you are
the problems you have now
most likely what you will be having
the risk you have
what to do
how "we" can help...
Myself, I trend and of the databases I watch, they pretty
muc
Walt I've done more netbackup stuff than i wanted to including creating
policies on the netbackup side.
send me a note offline and I can give you a call tomorrow.
joe
Weaver, Walt wrote:
Anybody using NetBackup with RMAN on Oracle 9i?
I'm currently trying to configure NetBackup on a soon-to-b
Okay, unregard, I think. I finally got around to reading the Recovery
Manager Users Guide and things are unchanged from 8i. So, I'm missing
something on the Netbackup configuration side, methinks...
--Walt
> -Original Message-
> From: Weaver, Walt
> Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 2:55 PM
Thanks for the
clarification. You got me nervous :)>>>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/23/03 04:09PM >>>that's not quite what I
said.I said Oracle will not support hot backups done without putting
thetablespace into "backup mode" unless that hot backup is done with
RMAN.at least that's what I thought I
that's not quite what I said.
I said Oracle will not support hot backups done without putting the
tablespace into "backup mode" unless that hot backup is done with RMAN.
at least that's what I thought I was saying.
you can still do the good old-fashioned "alter tablespace begin
backup"/backup th
Rachel - I am confused, now mind you it doesn't take much
:). Can you clarify on a statement you made? Oracle will not support
hot backups unless done w/ RMAD? I currently do hot backups w/ scripts
using IBM's flashcopy. Is the Oracle Tablespace hot backup mode no longer
supported? Than
Michael
But you do have a good reason why the client should hire you. ;-)
Dennis Williams
DBA, 80%OCP, 100% DBA
Lifetouch, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 12:39 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
I was afraid of that
--
ts of list
ORACLE-LSubject: RE: Veritas like
RMAN?Michael Don't discount the possibility
that they are just using Veritas to backup everything on the Oracle server.
Not correct, but I've seen people thatknow nothing about Oracle do
that.Dennis WilliamsDBA, 80%OCP, 100% DBALifetou
They are using RAID5, not mirroring, and the database,
for all the bigger it is needs some SERIOUS tuning.
There are procs that are taking over 1 million disk
i/o's to post a move in inventory..
Again, NOTHING in the alert log, just runs and runs,
no alter tablespace, just redo log changes. And n
I was afraid of that
--
Performing Remote Agent backup
Media Name: "Media created 7/18/2003 08:00:06 PM"
Backup of "\\FAILSAFE\V$ "
Backup set #11 on storage media #1
Backup set description: "DailyBackup"
Backup Type: FULL -
Can "they" point to backup sets from which you
can test recovery? As someone else mentioned,
that's the crucial issue.
There are a couple of possibilities:
Veritas can do volume mirroring, for example.
I haven't used this at the Veritas level but we
do something similar on our Hitachi SAN (to gen
you don't have backups. Oracle will only support recovery from hot
backups taken when the tablespaces are not flagged as in backup mode if
you do the backup via RMAN.
Technically, if you are very very lucky, the moon is in the seventh
house and Jupiter has aligned with Mars, you *MIGHT* be able to
Michael
Don't discount the possibility that they are just using Veritas to back
up everything on the Oracle server. Not correct, but I've seen people that
know nothing about Oracle do that.
Dennis Williams
DBA, 80%OCP, 100% DBA
Lifetouch, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message
When you say 'Vertias', which product are you referring to?
Veritas clusters don't use failsafe.
Jared
"Michael Kline" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
07/17/2003 02:39 PM
Please respond to ORACLE-L
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Title: veritas backup via RMAN troubles
I had a remarkably similar experience a
few months ago with Legato NetWorker and performed all of the steps you listed
with the same results. The problem turned out to be very simple.
The SA installed the 64-bit version of the Legato Networker cli
Just my $0.02 worth...With the advent of Rman (thus
making backups easy), and GUI volume managers and the
fact with QIO requires manual intervention for things
such as file extension/creation, I can't see what it
gives you (beside a higher license fee) over raw
devices.
hth
connor
--- "Aponte, T
Title: RE: Veritas Quick I/O for Oracle
Just
be careful using the convosync=delay and convosync=closesync
options. We have seen this corrupt redo log
records.
Nick
-Original Message-From: Aponte, Tony
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 2:09
PMTo
Title: RE: Veritas Quick I/O for Oracle
Dennis,
The benefits of QIO are realized not only by Oracle but also by the storage administrators. Oracle improvements come from kernelized async I/O, elimination of UNIX double-buffering and single-writer file header locking in the O/S. Storage
Joe, have you tried the Veritas support site?
There's a lot there, sometimes too much.
Jared
"Testa, Joe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
03/26/2003 10:04 AM
Please respond to ORACLE-L
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc:
DENNIS WILLIAMS wrote:
Is anyone using Veritas Quick I/O for Oracle? We are purchasing some new
Solaris systems with fiber channel and Veritas File System, and the Veritas
salesperson is claiming "up to 400 times faster". I would like to know if
anyone else has discovered this miracle and what bene
Title: RE: Veritas Quick I/O for Oracle
got a copy, benchmarked it. No discernable
difference for our application. Others I
know swear that it's great. So I guess it varies by
the application.
Matt Adams - GE Appliances - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Another month has ended.
All goal
we recently moved from t64 to sun and had io related perf issues w/o quick
io. once the veritas db version (which which quick io comes) was installed,
the performance was back on par with t64...
babu
- Original Message -
To: "Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent:
FYI... I think BLIB is the tool you're thinking of... It stands for Block
Level Incremental Backup...
Tim
-Original Message-
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 1:34 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Not necessarily. If you're backing up vxfs with Veritas Netbackup
and also ha
You're welcome.
Since you're interested in that, Veritas can also backup
databases in the same way, though we don't have the
product for that.
Block level incrementals without RMAN. Pretty cool
stuff if you ask me, provided recovery is as simple as it
is with RMAN. They can work magic when the
that's it.
Thanks Jared.
Pat.
-Original Message-
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 2:34 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Not necessarily. If you're backing up vxfs with Veritas Netbackup
and also have someother component from Veritas that I can't recall
at the moment, filesy
Not necessarily. If you're backing up vxfs with Veritas Netbackup
and also have someother component from Veritas that I can't recall
at the moment, filesystem incrementals are made at the FS block level.
You only backup new blocks, or blocks that have been touched.
Jared
On Wednesday 19 Februa
esday, February 19, 2003 4:01 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
> Subject: Re: Veritas Agent for Oracle / incremental backups vs. hot
> backups
>
>
> The difference in size depends on how much your data changes.
>
> If the percentage of inserts/updates/deletes
The difference in size depends on how much your data changes.
If the percentage of inserts/updates/deletes is relatively small, then
the backup time will decrease dramatically.
As someone else has pointed out, you will repay those time savings
at restore time. With small incrementals, the time t
Sorry, I wasn't thinking of RMAN only of an old style hot backup. My mistake.
Allan
-Original Message-
Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2003 3:05 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Allan, I disagree. From what I remember, rman incremental backups are also
block-level, hence the
Allan, I disagree. From what I remember, rman incremental backups are also
block-level, hence the savings in tape/disk and time. The tradeoff is at restore
time.
Unless you are talking about a Veritas utility? There's no other way I know of in
Oracle to execute an incremental backup outsid
Patrice,
Another list participant may verify or nullify this, but I think that both will take
the same space/time. In either case, it should be backing up the entire datafile.
Doing incremental backups with RMAN stands a good chance of saving you space/time as
it can back up only changed bloc
Actually assuming you checkpoint or commit at least once between backups it would not
make any difference at all. An incremental backup catches changed files since the
last backup which will typically be all your data files. SCN's get updated in all
headers if any thing changes.
Allan
-
I just was wondering if you gain anything by putting TEMP on Quick IO or not. I
understand the issues. We are probably going to QIO them to see if it buys us
anything.
I will check out Metaclunk.
Thanks Arun for the tip about Cached QIO. We were going to tinker with that as well.
We do
Kathy,
> The question was not HOW but SHOULD they be quick ioed.
> I am asking for your opionions on whether Temp should be or not.
I believe the problem is with sparse files (that are created by CREATE
TEMPORARY TABLESPACE ...) since QIO cannot handle them. So, I would create
(and use) a norm
1* Seems to have improved our read times. But I haven't really beachmarked it since
we did this
and a lot of tuning at the same time.
2* Yes
3* Yes we put in procedures so that you extend the file via qio
we aren't giving the file more space on the disk. We are just growing as we go.
n
we are using the quick I/O and as well as cached quik I/O also.
I had configured this a quite long time ago I have forgotten about temp
files issues which u people are talking about.
But We did have issues by just using quick I/O cause it acts like a cooked
raw file system and hence is write inten
Thanks but
The question was not HOW but SHOULD they be quick ioed.
I am asking for your opionions on whether Temp should be or not.
Kathy
Confidential
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are the property
of Belkin Components and/or its affiliates, are confidential,
and are i
Kathy,
> We are using Veritas Quick IO on our Solaris Box 6500 with
> Oracle Apps 11.5.6 on 8.1.7.2 database.
>
> Right now we do not have the temp files converted to quick io
> and wonder if we should. The guy who installed Quick IO
> didn't seen to think we could but he was a pretty junior
Hi Kathy,
Here is an excerpt from the Veritas Admin Guide.
Chapter 3, Using VERITAS Quick I/O P69
Handling Oracle Temporary Tablespaces and Quick I/O
You cannot convert temporary tablespaces using regular files to Quick I/O
files. By
default, qio_getdbfiles skips any tablespaces marked TE
Hi,
The following link has the procedure to convert temp files to qio files..
http://support.veritas.com/docs/233722
We have converted our temp files to qio files and I think from performance
point of they should be converted to qio.
Mohammed Ahsanuddin
Oracle DBA
-Original Message-
www,veritas.com
Typical product that are used with Oracle are:
Veritias Volume Mgr
Veritas Quick IO
Veritas NetBackup
hth
connor
--- Helen J Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote: > Can anyone supply a site or information about
how to
> use Veritas software as it applies to
> databases?
>
> ---
Ed,
I would be interested in getting a copy of your test scripts to try it out
on our setup. Solaris 8, veritas DBed 2.2 and Oracle 8.1.7.
Our performance has increased since switching to quick io, but that also
included a major application overhaul, and new disk layout and an upgrade
to 8.1.
> Hi George,
>
> I wanted to make sure that the information I was
> giving you was as accurate and current as possible.
> This prompted me to have one of my guys to check it
> out in the Veritas Documentation, before I sent out
> the note. The documentation for version 3.3, clearly
> states that t
Hi George,
I wanted to make sure that the information I was
giving you was as accurate and current as possible.
This prompted me to have one of my guys to check it
out in the Veritas Documentation, before I sent out
the note. The documentation for version 3.3, clearly
states that the default logi
> I/O tuning fundamentals require us to ensure that the
> filesystem blocksize = db_block_size. The default
> filesystem blocks size in Veritas is 1K and it is more
> than likely that almost every Veritas filesystem that
> is out there is in fact created with an 1K block size.
> This is true even
Gaja, you have a unique gift of ending a thread ;P
"Do not criticize someone until you walked a mile in their shoes, that way
when you criticize them, you are a mile a way and have their shoes."
Christopher R. Spence
Oracle DBA
Phone: (978) 322-5744
Fax:(707) 885-2275
Fuelspot
73 Princeton
Hi Satar & list,
To add to the issues and concerns that Jonathan has
already so eloquently outlined, let me add a key
factor that needs to be considered.
I/O tuning fundamentals require us to ensure that the
filesystem blocksize = db_block_size. The default
filesystem blocks size in Veritas is
--- Jonathan Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Is this the thread where Thomas says something
> about:
Yes, it is.
> Neither Thomas nor I made a throwaway remark
> suggesting a specific block size was appropriate
I meant to & should have wrote: "...why he would
recommend a 2k block size o
Is this the thread where Thomas says something about:
>I've done the same (recommend 2k blocks). It is true. I am serious.
2k is
>appropriate in some cases. some reasoning:
NOTE -- 'in some cases'
NOTE -- 'some reasoning'
and my follow-up post contains:
> Me too -
> Some mo
Hi Christopher,
Like I said, Oracle experts can argue this issue until
they are blue in the face, kinda like the
Certification debate. Without any information on the
data or application, I suggest a 2k block size.
Everyone is entitled to thier own opinion, and I hope
the author of the original po
But you can adjust the buffer chain latches to combat that.
I understand it isn't black and white, but a statement 2k for OLTP is a
black and white comment.
There is no simple answer for anything, in my opinion.
But there are many reasons why people claim on file systems to just use 8K
for most
Christofer,
maybe it is not black and white, though.
Bigger block size means more latch contention on cache buffers chains, for
example. That's why one may play around with minimize record_per_block or
artifically high pctfree. Both mean waste disk space and _memory_. Many of
larger block benefi
I disagree in the 2k for OLTP as well, for similar reasons Jonathan
mentioned, as well as a few of the obvious. Most OLTP are not PERFECTLY
tuned to only do indexes scans either. And indexes are much more efficient
on the larger block sizes as well
"Do not criticize someone until you walked a m
Hi Jonathan,
Sweeping statement...maybe. It all depends on your
application. That's why I put an emphasis on his/her
application (meaning both physical structure and data)
requirements. As a GENERAL rule of thumb, I
(personally) suggest (if possible) 2k for OLTP
databases. It's like if you ask me
That's a fairly sweeping statement to make without
any justification - after all, at 2K:
The block header is a much larger percentage
of the block size - so you lose space.
The probability of wasting space from the PCTFREE
setting increases - so you lose space.
The memory
If your application allows it, and if the Application
will not change in the future, then use a 2k block
size for OLTP database.
If you are not sure on the application needs, then
stick with 4k to be safe.
Regards,
Satar
--- Brian Haas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> According to the Veri
Jeffrey,
What version(s) of Oracle? Are you
using RMan?
We use Veritas NetBackup Data Center 3.4GA because our colocation facility
supplies it. We run Oracle8i 8.1.6 under
Win2k (dual 500MHz CPUs, 2GB RAM) and see in the neighborhood of 300MB/min (
about 200GB of backup in about 10 hrs)
"O'Neill, Sean" wrote:
>
> I know this is probably a case of RTFM BUT, BUT, BUT, if it is
> relatively simple to answer please do. The tape backup software here is
> Veritas Backup Exec which is managed by someone else (job demarcation!). I
> don't use it or have experience of it. We've ha
OS is NT.
1010 means OCI version error. Successfully compiled and ran the OCI
test program Oracle supplies.>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 7/25/01
4:43:30 PM >>>
Hi,
I use this same product,
however I don't use it to actually backup the databases. But you never
know, maybe my memory will come
Hi,
I use this same product,
however I don't use it to actually backup the databases. But you never
know, maybe my memory will come back to me and I could semi help.:)
What OS are you using, what's the 1010 error
again?
KK
-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[
Alex,
I think most everyone knew it was a joke.
Not everyone will get your jokes.
Not everyone gets my jokes.
I wouldn't have it any other way. ;)
Jared
On Monday 11 June 2001 13:36, Hillman, Alex wrote:
> I hoped that everybody understand that this was a joke. I use "damagement"
> and :-
2001 4:42 PM
> || To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
> || Subject: RE: Veritas Quick I/0 and Oracle/ Asycnchronous I/O
> ||
> ||
> || Let's see. What was that rule of thumb I heard from Kevin
> || Loney? I think it
> || was that each index slows down DML by a factor of 3 (a
as I said, 26 CPUs, 9GB RAM, lots of disks..
oh, and they wanted a bitmapped index on that table too
somedays it don't pay to get out of bed
>From: Henry Poras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <[EMAIL P
I suspect, as with most 'rules of thumb', that Kevin's
does not scale well.
|| -Original Message-
|| From: Henry Poras [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
|| Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 4:42 PM
|| To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
|| Subject: RE: Veritas Quick
Let's see. What was that rule of thumb I heard from Kevin Loney? I think it
was that each index slows down DML by a factor of 3 (at least for batch jobs
where you have to worry about recursive SQL). So 23 indexes would run about
70 times slower than no indexes. Do I sense a hardware throwing conte
LOL! You got one, Alex.
|| -Original Message-
|| From: Don Granaman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
|| Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 4:01 PM
|| To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
|| Subject: Re: Veritas Quick I/0 and Oracle/ Asycnchronous I/O
||
||
|| I disagree wholeheartedly with
It seems sarcasm may be beyond you. Check the smileys for emphasis in
Alex's mail.
- Original Message -
To: "Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 4:00 PM
> I disagree wholeheartedly with this statement Alex. How can you make this
> stat
ho do not understand
|| humor I repeate
|| again that it was a joke.
||
|| Alex Hillman
||
|| -Original Message-
|| From: Don Granaman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
|| Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 4:01 PM
|| To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
|| Subject: Re: Veritas Quick I/0 and Oracle/
I hoped that everybody understand that this was a joke. I use "damagement"
and :-) in the end. I hoped that it was grotesc. Apparently I was wrong. My
apologies for all offended. For people who do not understand humor I repeate
again that it was a joke.
Alex Hillman
-Original Message-
S
On Monday 11 June 2001 09:06, Rachel Carmichael wrote:
> OLTP system, main order table had 23 indexes on it. Because they wanted to
?!?!?!
That's just nuts.
> be able to search by customer first name, customer last name, recipient
> first name, recipient last name and had foreign keys all
I disagree wholeheartedly with this statement Alex. How can you make this
statement without knowing the situation? (You seem to be becoming the
resident troller in this group! Sorry, but it does appear that way.)
In spite of all evidence and repeated warnings, management often does not
allow t
Of cource you did not do your job properly. Or are you telling us that
damagement did not do their job properly? I have never heard anything more
ridiculous. :-).
Alex Hillman
-Original Message-
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 8:50 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Jared wrote:
Larry Herzog Jr. wrote:
> > But there WOULD be the possibility of using them with Sun E250s and E450s.
>
>>On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, George Schlossnagle wrote:
> Sure. Except that the drivers aren't available. Besides, these are really
> tiny, unscaleable boxes.
I didn't say it was a GOOD soluti
ACLE-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: RE: Veritas Quick I/0 and Oracle/ Asycnchronous I/O
>Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 06:55:29 -0800
>
> > What's wrong with that picture?
>
> You are telling them what they do not wish/want to listen ;)
> And I am making the s
> But there WOULD be the possibility of using them with Sun E250s and E450s.
Sure. Except that the drivers aren't available. Besides, these are really
tiny, unscaleable boxes.
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
--
Author: George Schlossnagle
INET: [EMAIL PROTE
>>On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Rachel Carmichael wrote:
> how about Sun E650, 26 CPUs (yes, I said 26), 9GB RAM
I assume you mean a Sun E6500 (since E650's don't exist). :)
--
Larry Herzog Jr."Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain
ZRXOA #1029 conceit, but in humility consider
st ORACLE-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: Veritas Quick I/0 and Oracle/ Asycnchronous I/O
>Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 06:55:30 -0800
>
> >>On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Rachel Carmichael wrote:
> > how about Sun E650, 26 CPUs (yes, I said 26), 9GB RAM
>
>I assume you mean a
01 7:50 AM
> To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
> Subject: Re: Veritas Quick I/0 and Oracle/ Asycnchronous I/O
>
> Jared wrote:
>
> >I just *had* to point this out. Had too many damagers want to solve
> >everything by buying HW when they have no idea what the pr
oops Sun E6500
>From: "Rachel Carmichael" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: Veritas Quick I/0 and Oracle/ Asycnchronous I/O
>Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 04:50:19 -0800
>
Jared wrote:
>I just *had* to point this out. Had too many damagers want to solve
>everything by buying HW when they have no idea what the problem is.
>
how about Sun E650, 26 CPUs (yes, I said 26), 9GB RAM
made the application fly. Until we hit THE ultimate peak stress day and
they died. I
>>On Sun, 10 Jun 2001, George Schlossnagle wrote:
> Hmmm so it's a pci only interface, so I can't use it with my
> Enterprise Sun systems, and drivers for Tru64 don't yet exist, so unless
> you're running Windoze, AIX or Linux, you're out of luck. That's a real
> bummer.
But there WOULD be t
On Sunday 10 June 2001 14:35, Paul Drake wrote:
> http://www.platypustechnology.com/default2.asp
Interesting product. This would be great for redo logs.
I can't help picking at one of their 'success' stories however.
This is from their website:
This customer
George,
Agreed about it being silly for swap on a *nix box, but if you're
running on a brain-dead OS that is going to page stuff out
uncontrollably (NT/W2K) even with lots of available memory - its still a
good idea to give the OS some pagefile space on NVRAM.
Ahh My lack of knowledge of runn
elspot
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Paul Drake [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2001 4:34 PM
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Re: Veritas Quick I/0 and Oracle/ Asycnchronous I/O
>>
>>
George Schlossnagle wrote:
>
> 1 for PCI NVRAM for swap and online redo
>
> I totally buy into using this sort of technology for online redo,
> but using it for swap just seems silly. You shouldn't be swapping anyway,
> and if you are it's much cheaper to buy ram than to buy a solid-state
1 for PCI NVRAM for swap and online redo
I totally buy into using this sort of technology for online redo, but using it for swap just seems silly. You shouldn't be swapping anyway, and if you are it's much cheaper to buy ram than to buy a solid-state disk.
64 bit slots allow for (max) 350 MB/se
: Paul Drake [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2001 4:34 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Veritas Quick I/0 and Oracle/ Asycnchronous I/O
>
> http://www.platypustechnology.com/default2.asp
Christopher,
I like the section that dicusses
AWESOME looking website
"Walking on water and developing software from a specification are easy if
both are frozen."
Christopher R. Spence
Oracle DBA
Fuelspot
-Original Message-
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2001 4:34 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.platypustech
http://www.platypustechnology.com/default2.asp
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
--
Author: Paul Drake
INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lis
Title: RE: Veritas Quick I/0 and Oracle/ Asycnchronous I/O
I
could not get this URL to work, are you sure it is "platypus.com".
I tried www.platypus.com and
it came up with some other non-related site. I would be greatly interested
in reading about this device.
"Walki
20
PMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: Re:
Veritas Quick I/0 and Oracle/ Asynchronous I/OIan
Quick IO does bypass the unix buffer cache completely,
thereby avoiding few problems such as double buffering, double copying, vnode
locks associated with the ufs,xfs or veritas
1 - 100 of 116 matches
Mail list logo
