Can ASM match ZFS for checksum and self healing? The reason I ask is
that the x45x0 uses inexpensive (less reluable) SATA drives. Even the
J4xxx paper you cite uses SAS for production data (only using SATA for
Oracle Flash, although I gave my concerns about that too).
The thing is, ZFS and the x45x0 seem made for eachother. The latter
only makes sense to me with all the goodness and assurance added by
the former.
Phil
On 21 Jan 2010, at 02:58, John <hort...@gmail.com> wrote:
Have you looked at using Oracle ASM instead of or with ZFS? Recent
Sun docs concerning the F5100 seem to recommend a hybrid of both.
If you don't go that route, generally you should separate redo logs
from actual data so they don't compete for I/O, since a redo switch
lagging hangs the database. If you use archive logs, separate that
on to yet another pool.
Realistically, it takes lots of analysis with different
configurations. Every workload and database is different.
A decent overview of configuring JBOD-type storage for databases is
here, though it doesn't use ASM...
https://www.sun.com/offers/docs/j4000_oracle_db.pdf
It's a couple years old and that might contribute to the lack of an
ASM mention.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
