C
ChUIMonster
Guest
What are you respectfully disagreeing about? 
As I read the original post the concern isn't so much about performance as it is that having the ai logs mixed with the db is a recoverability risk. The old-school approach of keeping them on different disks was primarily for recoverability -- if you lose the db disk you still have the ai logs. Of course even with that setup there was still the risk that an event that takes out the whole disk subsystem (bad controller, SAN falling through the floor, fire, flood, theft of equipment, storage admin forgetting that this is PROD not DEV...) would still result in the both the db and the ai logs being destroyed together. So while you get /some/ benefit from distinct disks it doesn't solve every media loss problem.
Continue reading...
As I read the original post the concern isn't so much about performance as it is that having the ai logs mixed with the db is a recoverability risk. The old-school approach of keeping them on different disks was primarily for recoverability -- if you lose the db disk you still have the ai logs. Of course even with that setup there was still the risk that an event that takes out the whole disk subsystem (bad controller, SAN falling through the floor, fire, flood, theft of equipment, storage admin forgetting that this is PROD not DEV...) would still result in the both the db and the ai logs being destroyed together. So while you get /some/ benefit from distinct disks it doesn't solve every media loss problem.Continue reading...