Ocfs2 users - Feb 2009 - ASM over OCFS2 vs. Standard locally managed tablespaces

Hello All,

 

Are there any benchmarks with respect to performance with respect to ASM
over OCFS2 vs. standard locally managed tablespaces?

In our environment, data files hosting tables/lobs are stored on a RAID6
disk array with 10K rpm disks, whilst indices are  stored on a different
RAID6 disk array with 15K rpm disks.

We're using oracle managed files for the rollback/undo and temporary
tablespaces. 

Would ASM over OCFS2 be smart enough to detect the fast LUNs? 

 

Appreciate your thoughts.

 

Best regards,

Karim

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://oss.oracle.com/pipermail/ocfs2-users/attachments/20090207/b1547c34/attachment.html

OTN has a forum for ASM. Please post this qs on that forum.

On Feb 7, 2009, at 6:51 AM, Karim Alkhayer <kkhayer at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello All,
>
>
>
> Are there any benchmarks with respect to performance with respect to  
> ASM over OCFS2 vs. standard locally managed tablespaces?
>
> In our environment, data files hosting tables/lobs are stored on a  
> RAID6 disk array with 10K rpm disks, whilst indices are  stored on a  
> different RAID6 disk array with 15K rpm disks.
>
> We?re using oracle managed files for the rollback/undo and temporary 
>  tablespaces.
>
> Would ASM over OCFS2 be smart enough to detect the fast LUNs?
>
>
>
> Appreciate your thoughts.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Karim
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ocfs2-users mailing list
> Ocfs2-users at oss.oracle.com
> http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs2-users

Thanks Luis/Martin for your thoughts

 

I?m raising this comparison noting the following givens:

RAC is operating on Oracle 10.1.0.5; so the ASM is a bit far beyond hot
fixes.

OCFS2 is also old on SLES9 SP3. That?s why we?re considering the upgrade to
SLES10 SP2.

Oracle software upgrade is not an option for the moment due to applications?
certification.

The RAC + Standby node will be sharing a file system prepared specifically
for recovery  and staging, so that we don?t have to rely on the network
during crisis.

Since we?re upgrading to SLES10 SP2, it is expected to have OCFS2 much more
stable. However, I still believe that we?ll be stuck to the existing setup
where the databases are not self-managed, and because of the upgrade is
primarily for the sake of OCFS2 . That?s why ASM over OCFS2, from a concept
point of view, could introduce the best of the two worlds.

 

Best regards,

Karim

 

 

 

From: Schmitter, Martin [mailto:Martin.Schmitter at opitz-consulting.de] 
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 3:52 PM
To: Karim Alkhayer; lfreitas34 at yahoo.com; ocfs2-users at oss.oracle.com
Subject: AW: [Ocfs2-users] ASM over OCFS2 vs. Standard locally managed
tablespaces

 

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

Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Bernhard Opitz, Martin Bertelsmeier 

HRB-Nr. 39163 Amtsgericht K?ln

  _____  

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/20090209/6b6bfae5/attachment-0001.html

Hi Karim,

this sound like hard work to do. ;-)

May be this is intressting:

I have heard that it would be possible to drive CRS and ASM Version 11 with
Oracle DB version 10g. All information?s without warranty, of course.

May be you can re-think about the standby solution. Than I would apply, that
this is a suitable solution.

Good Luck


Martin Schmitter


--


OPITZ CONSULTING Gummersbach GmbH
Martin Schmitter - Fachinformatiker
Kirchstr. 6 - 51647 Gummersbach
http://www.opitz-consulting.de
Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Bernhard Opitz, Martin Bertelsmeier
HRB-Nr. 39163 Amtsgericht K?ln


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://oss.oracle.com/pipermail/ocfs2-users/attachments/20090209/17b0a745/attachment.html

The upgrade is possible using DBUA, The databases will not be affected with
the ASM upgrade as they will remain in the original release

Thing is, the approach is not certified on 10.1. only 10.2 onwards, but the
same technique might work

 

For ASM to work with OCFS2, the ?ASM disks? must be pre-sized, similar to
the ocr and voting disks creation

 

The final product should be quite interesting!

 

Cheers,

Karim 

 

 

 

From: Schmitter, Martin [mailto:Martin.Schmitter at opitz-consulting.de] 
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 4:26 PM
To: Karim Alkhayer; lfreitas34 at yahoo.com; ocfs2-users at oss.oracle.com
Subject: AW: [Ocfs2-users] ASM over OCFS2 vs. Standard locally managed
tablespaces

 

 

Hi Karim,

 

this sound like hard work to do. ;-)

 

May be this is intressting:

 

I have heard that it would be possible to drive CRS and ASM Version 11 with
Oracle DB version 10g. All information?s without warranty, of course.

 

May be you can re-think about the standby solution. Than I would apply, that
this is a suitable solution.

 

Good Luck

 

 

 

Martin Schmitter

 

 

-- 

 

 

OPITZ CONSULTING Gummersbach GmbH

Martin Schmitter - Fachinformatiker

Kirchstr. 6 - 51647 Gummersbach

http://www.opitz-consulting.de

Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Bernhard Opitz, Martin Bertelsmeier 

HRB-Nr. 39163 Amtsgericht K?ln

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://oss.oracle.com/pipermail/ocfs2-users/attachments/20090209/0add6686/attachment.html

Hi Karim,

this sounds sportive.

I don?t know why you have concerns about networking with your standby. But I
really suggest waive OCFS2. Believe me, you will run into lot of trouble. And
this sounds to me, like a very important system. OCFS2 makes the solution more
complex and more fragile.

Please do not misunderstand this. OCFS2 is a good file system. But OCFS2 in
conjunction with CLUSTERWARE/CRS will be very tricky. If there is no way, make
sure that your timings will work perfect! Otherwise you will have a tumbler.

Networking should not be your problem. A good switch and some truncs and may be
some bonding und you will be save.

Good Luck

Martin Schmitter


--


OPITZ CONSULTING Gummersbach GmbH
Martin Schmitter - Fachinformatiker
Kirchstr. 6 - 51647 Gummersbach
http://www.opitz-consulting.de
Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Bernhard Opitz, Martin Bertelsmeier
HRB-Nr. 39163 Amtsgericht K?ln

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://oss.oracle.com/pipermail/ocfs2-users/attachments/20090209/399b5b21/attachment-0001.html