[Ocfs2-users] ASM over OCFS2 vs. Standard locally managed tablespaces

[Schmitter, Martin]

Hi Karim,

as Luis already stated:

It is not useful to install an ASM “Cluster File System!” on OCFS2. ASM is a full functional Cluster File System for Oracle DBs 10g and 11g. There is no need of a second Cluster File System. You will run in a lot of trouble setting the right timeout’s and preventing different decisions of the CRS and OCFS2. Please keep in mind, that both (CRS and OCFS2) are able to reboot your nodes. If you are working with 10g or 11g make use of ASM! Take care of the ASM Hot Fixes! ASM does all you need. Load balancing, striping, mirroring, and a lot more…

OCFS2 is a good choice if you are using 3rd party applications and you need a shared storage. E.g. you are using Oracle 9i with CRS. Oracle 9i data files won’t work with ASM, so you need another Cluster File System. If have done a project with 9i and CRS on OCFS2. This was hard work, but it works fine.

OCFS2 is really great, but if your running a database 10g or 11g, ASM is and will be the best choice.

BR

Martin Schmitter


--


OPITZ CONSULTING Gummersbach GmbH
Martin Schmitter - Fachinformatiker
Kirchstr. 6 - 51647 Gummersbach
http://www.opitz-consulting.de
Geschäftsführer: Bernhard Opitz, Martin Bertelsmeier
HRB-Nr. 39163 Amtsgericht Köln
________________________________
Von: ocfs2-users-bounces at oss.oracle.com [ocfs2-users-bounces at oss.oracle.com] im Auftrag von Karim Alkhayer [kkhayer at gmail.com]
Gesendet: Montag, 9. Februar 2009 13:47
An: lfreitas34 at yahoo.com; ocfs2-users at oss.oracle.com
Betreff: Re: [Ocfs2-users] ASM over OCFS2 vs. Standard locally managed tablespaces

We’re using OCFS2 for RAC on top of  SLES9, which we’re going to upgrade to SLES10. Around 10 TB RAID6 multi disk arrays, 5 databases on RAC, and 5 single instances standby for the primary site

As there is no AI component in ASM to detect the fast LUNs, and RAC on SLES requires a shared file system. Therefore, on a set of identical LUNs, in terms of capacity and speed, ASM should take care of distributing the balance over LUNs, and OCFS2 is expected to work even better if these LUNs are placed on several disk groups (arrays)

How would this scenario (ASM over OCFS2) work? What are the cons and pros? Keep in mind that the goal of such a concept is provide performance and reliability with  the least possible administration

Appreciate your thoughts

Best regards,
Karim



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://oss.oracle.com/pipermail/ocfs2-users/attachments/20090209/73b56890/attachment.html