Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

GFS, OCFS, and GPFS - Which Filesystem for Oracle?

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the proper-care-and-feeding-of-a-high-octane-RDBMS dept.

amani asks: "My company has a Oracle 9i RAC database running on a Sun cluster. In 6 months we are looking to replace the cluster with either a Linux or an AIX solution that will involve SAN storage. I see that their are a variety of filesystems for Oracle and Linux. Sistina (Red Hat) has the GFS, Oracle has the OCFS, and IBM has GPFS. Does anyone know the pros and cons of each of these filesystems ,and which one would be better for a continuously growing database?"

2 of 36 comments (clear)

  1. IBM GPFs? by Samus · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Hey when did IBM steal GPFs from Microsoft? Personally the name alone in that one would make me stear wide and far from it. Of course that could just be IBMs awful marketing department at work again. It might even be better than the others. Yes this post adds nothing to the conversation except a little humor. Moderate as you feel you should.

    --
    In Republican America phones tap you.
  2. General Protection FaultS? by rogueMonkey · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    > IBM has GPFS I'd stay away from a product named after a Microsoft bug.