![]() | |
![]() |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
| |||
| |||
|
#2
| |||
| |||
|
|
Has anyone done any benchmarks to compare performance of ASM using RAW partitions vs. NFS (especially NFS on Netapp)? A Netapp 3070 is coming my way in about a month so I can't do any testing ahead of time but wondering what anyone else could share. |
#3
| |||
| |||
|
|
orcl... (AT) gmail (DOT) com wrote: Has anyone done any benchmarks to compare performance of ASM using RAW partitions vs. NFS (especially NFS on Netapp)? A Netapp 3070 is coming my way in about a month so I can't do any testing ahead of time but wondering what anyone else could share. NFS mount will likely be a bit slower than ASM on RAW but there is more to the equation than that. NetApp's NFS has no issues with respect to device persistence. NetApp's NFS is essentially plug-and-play. Total configuration time should be an hour or two. Fewer moving parts. That said ... which is the better choice depends on what you are going to do with it. -- Daniel A. Morgan University of Washington damor...@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond) Puget Sound Oracle Users Groupwww.psoug.org |
#4
| |||
| |||
|
|
orcl... (AT) gmail (DOT) com wrote: Has anyone done any benchmarks to compare performance of ASM using RAW partitions vs. NFS (especially NFS on Netapp)? A Netapp 3070 is coming my way in about a month so I can't do any testing ahead of time but wondering what anyone else could share. NFS mount will likely be a bit slower than ASM on RAW but there is more to the equation than that. NetApp's NFS has no issues with respect to device persistence. NetApp's NFS is essentially plug-and-play. Total configuration time should be an hour or two. Fewer moving parts. That said ... which is the better choice depends on what you are going to do with it. |
#5
| |||
| |||
|
|
On May 25, 10:51 am, DA Morgan <damor... (AT) psoug (DOT) org> wrote: orcl... (AT) gmail (DOT) com wrote: Has anyone done any benchmarks to compare performance of ASM using RAW partitions vs. NFS (especially NFS on Netapp)? A Netapp 3070 is coming my way in about a month so I can't do any testing ahead of time but wondering what anyone else could share. NFS mount will likely be a bit slower than ASM on RAW but there is more to the equation than that. NetApp's NFS has no issues with respect to device persistence. NetApp's NFS is essentially plug-and-play. Total configuration time should be an hour or two. Fewer moving parts. That said ... which is the better choice depends on what you are going to do with it. I found: http://download-east.oracle.com/docs...ll.102/b15667/... - but there is no mention of directio mount options, just wondering what other options I should use aside from those mentioned in the Oracle documentation. Thanks |
#6
| |||
| |||
|
|
That is an option to use ASM on a NAS, it is required if you use RAC standard edition, otherwise it makes no much sense. |
#7
| |||
| |||
|
|
On May 25, 11:01 am, Cristian Cudizio <cristian.cudi... (AT) yahoo (DOT) it wrote: That is an option to use ASM on a NAS, it is required if you use RAC standard edition, otherwise it makes no much sense. thanks - the configuration would be for 10g enterprise edition, probably 3 node RAC. I'm trying to get an idea how much performance loss there is using NFS vs. RAW. thanks From what has already exposed Kevin Closson there is a very little loss of performance, |
#8
| |||
| |||
|
|
i recomend you to visit http://kevinclosson.wordpress.com/ you will find there also some link to documented benchmarks. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |