Re: SA vs. DBA Issues With IDS and RAID 1+0

From: John Leyden <john_leyden@nysd.uscourts.gov> > >I have read with interest the IIUG archive, and particularly Mr. Kagel's >postings about the technical superiority of RAID 1+0. However, from that >massive collection of postings I came away with the (possibly erroneous) >impression that the high degree of fault tolerance associated with RAID >1+0 may come at the price of having a somewhat more complex IDS database >to manage. Would some of you please elaborate upon the extent to which >RAID 1+0 may dictate or rule out certain schema configuration options >for the DBA (e.g. quantity and size of chunks and dbspaces, placement of >dbspaces, whether or not table and index fragmentation is desirable). I am not aware of any such negative consequence. >In addition, do any of you have any particular configuration suggestions >to make for an IDS database application that by design has a large >number of UNIX files to keep track of? In other words, instead of >storing files (spreadsheets, word processing documents, etc.) within the >IDS database using SLOB or BLOB data elements, the database records the >location of the file on an external UNIX file system. (Don't ask.) My >understanding is that one would choose a different stripe block size for >the database than for the file system. Is there anything else that one >ought to consider? Over to Art, I guess... >Thanks in advance for your insightful commentary. Oh, sorry, you confused me with someone else. :0) ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com