Sybase using JFS instead of Raw Partitions

Sybase is adamant that we should not use the AIX JFS.  We could have data integrity problems.  They won't get specific on how an why.  Oracle uses JFS and works just fine.  Sybase also installs by default using NT file systems.  What gives?  We have been testing on a small AIX box using the Journal File System (JFS) instead of Raw Partitions.  We have tried a number of update processes and have literally pulled the plug on the box.  It recovers nicely.  I need a straight answer. So far testing has only shown Sybase needs to get their act together. JFS is fast!
blacksAsked:
Who is Participating?
I wear a lot of hats...

"The solutions and answers provided on Experts Exchange have been extremely helpful to me over the last few years. I wear a lot of hats - Developer, Database Administrator, Help Desk, etc., so I know a lot of things but not a lot about one thing. Experts Exchange gives me answers from people who do know a lot about one thing, in a easy to use platform." -Todd S.

n0thingCommented:
Hi,

   I would recommend you to use raw partition instead of JFS ...
I'm having problems using ufs(Solaris 2.5 FS). I was using ufs,
and my database is kinda huge (18 gig). I've to insert around
500.000 rows a day and doing large SELECT on it... much faster with raw. Also, Sybase does recover more quickly with raw than Unix FS. It will work just fine with small database, but if you want to add on more partition to it, the more you add the worse performance gets. If you need some real testing, lets try to insert/update/delete 10000 rows with raw & with JFS. You'll see the difference. The way Sybase writes its data in raw is more efficient than JFS. I think in the Sybase man page somewhere, it
does explain why you should use raw instead of JFS. I don't have it here, but right now I'm maitaining 6 different Sybase databases with over 1 millions records in/out every day. Raw is much faster, specially on recovery, took me usually 1-2 hours to
recover my database now instead of 3-6 hours. I'm on a Sparc Ultra 2 with dual CPU and 384Megs of memory on it. If your database is small and doesn't do intense queries/updates like mine. Just use the fs you like. Otherwise go for raw.
   Just my little comments. If you need more details, you should
talk to an independant Sybase expert and get Sybase docs on raw vs Unix fs.

Regards,
Minh Lai

0

Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by

Your issues matter to us.

Facing a tech roadblock? Get the help and guidance you need from experienced professionals who care. Ask your question anytime, anywhere, with no hassle.

Start your 7-day free trial
It's more than this solution.Get answers and train to solve all your tech problems - anytime, anywhere.Try it for free Edge Out The Competitionfor your dream job with proven skills and certifications.Get started today Stand Outas the employee with proven skills.Start learning today for free Move Your Career Forwardwith certification training in the latest technologies.Start your trial today
Sybase Database

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.