Tom推荐的RAID配置

http://asktom.oracle.com/pls/asktom/f?p=100:11:0::::P11_QUESTION_ID:359617936136

这个问题是2000提出的，8年过去了，Tom的回答还适用吗？

Here is what I like (raid 0 = stripes, raid 1 = mirrors, raid 5 = striping+parity):

o no raid, raid 0 or raid 0+1 for online redo logs AND control files. You should
still let us multiplex them ourselves even if you mirror them. We have more
opportunities for failure if the raid subsystem reports a "warning" back to us -- if we
have multiplexed them -- we are OK with that.

o no raid or raid 0 for temporary datafiles (used with temporary tablespaces).
no raid/raid 0 is sufficient. If you lose these, who cares? You want speed on these,
not reliability. If a disk fails, drop and recreate temp elsewhere.

o no raid, raid 0 or raid 0+1 for archive. Again, let us multiplex if you use no
raid or raid 0, let the OS do it (different from online redo log here) if you use 0+1.

o raid 0+1 for rollback. It get written to lots. It is important to have protected.
We cannot multiplex them so let the OS do it. Use this for datafiles you believe will
be HEAVILY written. Bear in mind, we buffer writes to datafiles, they happen in the
background so the poor write performance of raid 5 is usually OK except for the heavily
written files (such as rollback).

o raid 5 (unless you can do raid 0+1 for all of course) for datafiles that experience
what you determine to be "medium" or "moderate" write activity. Since this happens in
the background typcially (not with direct path loads and such) -- raid 5 can typically be
safely used with these. As these files represent the BULK of your database and the above
represent the smaller part -- you achieve most of the cost saving without impacting
performance too much.

Try to dedicate specific devices to

o online redo
o archive
o temp

they should not have to share their devices with others in a "perfect" world (even with
eachother).

来自 “ ITPUB博客 ” ，链接：http://blog.itpub.net/418/viewspace-373117/，如需转载，请注明出处，否则将追究法律责任。

转载于:http://blog.itpub.net/418/viewspace-373117/