<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Raw device vs. Fs. In HP-cluster in Operating System - HP-UX</title>
    <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/raw-device-vs-fs-in-hp-cluster/m-p/4865967#M863285</link>
    <description>Hi,&lt;BR /&gt;yes i have interconnect with 1Gb and switch(private ip).&lt;BR /&gt;My hardware it's two node with 3 itanium processor for node and 10Gb of memory.&lt;BR /&gt;The same database in single instance in PA-RISC processor plataform (4 processor) it's faster.&lt;BR /&gt;The disk are the in the same box, in two plataform , HP-VA with san network fddi .&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Best regards.&lt;BR /&gt;Francesco</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Oct 2004 02:47:54 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Francesco_13</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2004-10-19T02:47:54Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Raw device vs. Fs. In HP-cluster</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/raw-device-vs-fs-in-hp-cluster/m-p/4865965#M863283</link>
      <description>Hi,&lt;BR /&gt;i have low performance with Raw device Rac Oracle database, the same database in FS run fine!  . I have read many forum document in Metalink, but i don't know what change for eliminate low performance.&lt;BR /&gt;I use already ASYNC_IO = TRUE , i have a lot of buffer cache of OS..where i can find a solution?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Thanks.&lt;BR /&gt;Best regards.&lt;BR /&gt;Francesco</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Oct 2004 02:36:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/raw-device-vs-fs-in-hp-cluster/m-p/4865965#M863283</guid>
      <dc:creator>Francesco_13</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2004-10-19T02:36:36Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Raw device vs. Fs. In HP-cluster</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/raw-device-vs-fs-in-hp-cluster/m-p/4865966#M863284</link>
      <description>Hi,&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;RAC is always slower than standard installation.&lt;BR /&gt;What is your hardware configuration ?&lt;BR /&gt;Do you use 1Gb link between cluster node1 for synchronization ?</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Oct 2004 02:42:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/raw-device-vs-fs-in-hp-cluster/m-p/4865966#M863284</guid>
      <dc:creator>Slawomir Gora</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2004-10-19T02:42:33Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Raw device vs. Fs. In HP-cluster</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/raw-device-vs-fs-in-hp-cluster/m-p/4865967#M863285</link>
      <description>Hi,&lt;BR /&gt;yes i have interconnect with 1Gb and switch(private ip).&lt;BR /&gt;My hardware it's two node with 3 itanium processor for node and 10Gb of memory.&lt;BR /&gt;The same database in single instance in PA-RISC processor plataform (4 processor) it's faster.&lt;BR /&gt;The disk are the in the same box, in two plataform , HP-VA with san network fddi .&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Best regards.&lt;BR /&gt;Francesco</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Oct 2004 02:47:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/raw-device-vs-fs-in-hp-cluster/m-p/4865967#M863285</guid>
      <dc:creator>Francesco_13</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2004-10-19T02:47:54Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Raw device vs. Fs. In HP-cluster</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/raw-device-vs-fs-in-hp-cluster/m-p/4865968#M863286</link>
      <description>Hi,&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I think that you should start with some performance test especially for disk: (glance, sar, iostat) - look at %busy do disks.</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Oct 2004 03:13:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/raw-device-vs-fs-in-hp-cluster/m-p/4865968#M863286</guid>
      <dc:creator>Slawomir Gora</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2004-10-19T03:13:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Raw device vs. Fs. In HP-cluster</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/raw-device-vs-fs-in-hp-cluster/m-p/4865969#M863287</link>
      <description>Hi,&lt;BR /&gt;ok i can do it , but the Cluster it's free of any charge! I test with a simple large select in one only table in one only Oracle tablespace/raw device. &lt;BR /&gt;The wait for read it's high,  but i don't know a reason. I/o statistics i think it's powerful for many access to all disks.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Regards.&lt;BR /&gt;Francesco</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Oct 2004 03:20:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/raw-device-vs-fs-in-hp-cluster/m-p/4865969#M863287</guid>
      <dc:creator>Francesco_13</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2004-10-19T03:20:58Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Raw device vs. Fs. In HP-cluster</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/raw-device-vs-fs-in-hp-cluster/m-p/4865970#M863288</link>
      <description>Hi,&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;do you have the latest Oracle patches &lt;BR /&gt;- maby it is some Oracle bug.</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Oct 2004 03:50:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/raw-device-vs-fs-in-hp-cluster/m-p/4865970#M863288</guid>
      <dc:creator>Slawomir Gora</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2004-10-19T03:50:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Raw device vs. Fs. In HP-cluster</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/raw-device-vs-fs-in-hp-cluster/m-p/4865971#M863289</link>
      <description>Hi,&lt;BR /&gt;yes i have lastest patch 9.2.0.5 RAC Itanium&lt;BR /&gt;Not bug with Raw in Itanium are reported in metalink..&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Regards.&lt;BR /&gt;FRancesco&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Oct 2004 03:55:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/raw-device-vs-fs-in-hp-cluster/m-p/4865971#M863289</guid>
      <dc:creator>Francesco_13</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2004-10-19T03:55:08Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Raw device vs. Fs. In HP-cluster</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/raw-device-vs-fs-in-hp-cluster/m-p/4865972#M863290</link>
      <description>Hi,&lt;BR /&gt;the problem it's in different speed when HP-UX use FS o RAw device. I will open other thread for this.&lt;BR /&gt;Thanks.&lt;BR /&gt;Best regards.</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Oct 2004 01:21:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/raw-device-vs-fs-in-hp-cluster/m-p/4865972#M863290</guid>
      <dc:creator>Francesco_13</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2004-10-20T01:21:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

