Hi folks,
We'll be moving our Oracle 7.3.3.6 database from VMS to DU4.0D soon, and
are debating what file systems to use for the Oracle database files.
I'd really appreciate it if some of you who have done this already would
share your wisdom. I checked the archives, and found one summary of a
general question on Oracle tuning on DU. I'm hoping for more specifics
here -- which way did you decide and why?
We've got lots of experience with DU 4.0A and earlier (not yet with
4.0D), and lots with Oracle, but none with Oracle on DU or on any other
Unix.
The system will be a 4100 starting with 2GB memory, 2 500MHz CPUs, and
an RA7000 disk array with a single HSZ70 (128MB cache) and 18 9GB 7200
RPM UltraSCSI disks. We'll have execellent power conditioning, but no
UPS. (BTW, this is our first RA7000, and we're just now starting to
read about how to configure and manage it.) We haven't yet determined
which exact Oracle version we'll be using, but we know it'll be
7.something, since our application vendor hasn't blessed Oracle 8 yet.
The application is our integrated Student Records system (Banner), which
I guess you'd say is more of a traditional OLTP system than anything
else, though we also have some heavy reporting requirements. Mainly,
this box will be dedicated database server, but it will have a small
number of local interactive users running SQL*Forms and SQL*Plus.
We want to design our tablespaces and file systems so as to make hot
backup feasible.
The current thought is to use RAID 0+1 (striping + mirroring) on the
HSZ70 to provide good performance and redundancy. (Any other
suggestions?)
The question is, for the Oracle data files, what file systems should we
use on top of the RAID sets, if any.
Here's what I've been able to gather so far.
Raw disk partitions
-------------------
Pro: Minor performance improvement in some cases due to lack
of file system overhead.
Con: Must use extra cost Oracle backup utility.
No way to expand a partition on the fly.
No filesystem read-ahead, so sequential reads may be
slower.
Advfs file system (with advfs utilities add-on product)
-------------------------------------------------------
Pro: Dynamic resizing
No fsck at boot.
Good performance.
Can use clone file system to backup.
Very easy to manage (we've got lot's of experience with it).
Con: History of instability. ADVFS has been working great for us
on DU4.0a + patches, but we remember awful problems in the
past, and have heard there are new problems with DU4.0D.
UFS
---
Pro: Very stable. Has been around a long time, and seems to
have few bugs.
Good performance.
Con: Fsck required after powerfail, making reboots take much
longer (Is there any way to mitigate this -- say by tuning
for fewer inodes?).
Cannot add space dynamically.
Thanks in advance for your help. I'll summarize.
--
-- Phil Rand <prand_at_spu.edu>, aka <postmaster_at_spu.edu>
-- http://www.spu.edu/users/prand (206) 281-2428
-- Computer and Information Systems
-- Seattle Pacific University
-- 3307 3rd Ave. W., Seattle, WA 98119
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"One person CAN change the world, but most of the time,
you probably shouldn't." -- Marge Simpson
Received on Tue Nov 17 1998 - 20:36:32 NZDT