Optimal 3510 configuration for Oracle - upgrade to 6140

Greetings,

We've been using a few 3510's as DAS for the last few years. I'm looking at making some changes to the current config for one 3510 (dual RAID ctlrs) connected to a V880 (2x1.2GHz CPU, 4GB RAM). The 3510 is currently at firmware 413C which appears to need an upgrade from what I've read here.

Before changing anything though I wanted to find out what others are doing or have done. We are using the arrays for Oracle 9i databases primarily housing the database files themselves. Redo logs are written to internal FC drives on the V880. This system has Veritas Volume manager 3.5 MP4. The 3510 LD is just seen as a volume in Veritas VM. No added veritas mirroring. UFS is also being used here as well with the forcedirectio option. This is on Solaris 9.

Currently, one database that is about 65GB in size sits on 3 x 73GB 10K drives (1 LD) and that is mirrored to another 3 drives. Currently, the database performance is not stellar. So I was thinking of redoing this so the LD would be spread over 6 physical drives and then mirrored to another 6 drives. That would leave a lot of "extra" space not used in one LD. Would it be a good idea to divide that LD into additonal LUNs? Use one for database files and one for Redo logs? Ideally, you want them separated to different physical disks but with the load being spread out across many more disks, would this work? Anyone had experience trying this?

What would be the optimal Oracle setup with the 3510?

Also, we are looking at getting a new V490 system for an application upgrade, would we be better off getting a 6140 array for better IO with the new system vs. adding a tray or two of (15k 73GB drives) to our existing 3510s? Would the extra cost of the 6140 be worth it?

Sorry for the long post, any comments or suggestions welcomed.

Thanks,

Dennis

[1871 byte] By [dennis.jonesa] at [2007-11-26 18:39:04]
# 1

Don't apologise for making a long post, this type of stuff is very interesting! I will give a partial response. Most important issue here is the firmware, there is a known issue with 4.1x whereby the controller changes cache configuration while the battery is charging, this causes degradation in performance. Attention should be given to this issue first in order to eliminate this issue as a possible cause of the performance degradation. My approach to any database system is that each database will have a unique I/O profile. Without the I/O profile, any attempt to make changes to the system configuration would be frivolous. I would not recommend that you consider the hardware upgrade until you can squeeze the maximum performance out of you existing hardware.

m-lennona at 2007-7-9 6:13:06 > top of Java-index,Storage Forums,Storage General Discussion...