SUMMARY: partitioning for Oracle

From: Yura Pismerov <>
Date: Fri May 24 2002 - 11:45:28 EDT
Heflin Hogan wrote:
> There is no real reason to allocate a large number of partitions for an
> oracle instance anymore, and even Oracle doesn't recommend doing things taht
> way anymore. The idea was to spread IO out over several drives and channels
> to improve performance, but it doesn't really apply with modern storage
> subsystems (unless you can convince your management to buy several T3 arrays
> to cover the DBAs' request). Oracle has a white paper out on something
> called the Oracle Flexible Architecture (I think), which covers the way
> Oracle thinks the database directory structure should be laid out, but it
> doesn't specify a physical allocation method.
> -Heflin Hogan
> Systems Integrator
> Ariba, Inc.

	Thanks for the reply !

	Also big thanks to:

Jonathan Burelbach 
Lin Feng
Simon Greenland
Erwin Fritz
Jay Koonz
Steve Hunt
Alex Pleszko
Alexandre Perematko
John Phillips
Carl Gobbo
Steven Haywood
Andrew Rotramel
Michael Maciolek

Sorry if I don't mention somebody since the replies are still coming.

The conclusion is, the proposed partitioning method is obsolete and is
to be reviewed due to dramatic 
changes in storage technology field that happened since the original
Oracle recommendations were written.
There is still some reasons to create multiple partitions but having a
dozen of them per instance is overkill. The "rule of thumb" is keep
data, redologs, archived logs and control files on separate
partitions (better yet spindles or disk groups in case of RAID
configuration) in order to minimize
disk IO impact. In case of small configurations when everything resides
on one spindle it does not 
make much sense to create a separate partition for each class of Oracle
data. And of course it does not make sense at all to create multiple
partitions for the same type/class (ie data1, data2, data3, etc).
Thanks again everybody. This list rocks ! :)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yura Pismerov []
> Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 9:18 AM
> To:
> Subject: partitioning for Oracle
>         Sorry for off-topic,
> I'm trying to "fight" DBA regarding partitioning method they propose for
> our Oracle boxes.
> Every time they request a few dozen (!) partitions such as data[0-N],
> arch[0-N], redolog[0-N],
> trace[0-N] etc etc.
> In my opinion it does not make sense since the mentioned partitions are
> located on
> RAID1+0 so nothing is gained in terms of performance. Also I have to
> mess around with moving data once
> one of the partitions gets full. Not to mention fewer number of
> partitions is obviously easier to
> maintain in such events as manual filesystem check.
>         Could anybody tell me if there are real advantages of doing that
> crazy
> partitioning ?
> Our DBA manager is going to conduct "educational" session with
> operations team to explain the reasons
> they keep doing this. I just need some more arguments...
> Thanks in advance.
> --
> Yuri Pismerov, Sr. System Administrator,
> TUCOWS.COM INC. (416) 535-0123  ext. 1352
> _______________________________________________
> sunmanagers mailing list


Yuri Pismerov, Sr. System Administrator, 
TUCOWS.COM INC.	(416) 535-0123  ext. 1352
sunmanagers mailing list
Received on Fri May 24 11:51:49 2002

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Mar 03 2016 - 06:42:44 EST