in past the asmlib could be downloaded from otn. For Oracle Linux 6.x the website shows:
"The Oracle ASMLib kernel driver is now included in the Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel. No driver package needs to be installed when using this kernel. The oracleasm-support and oracleasmlib packages still need to be installed from ULN."
The kernel driver is included in the UEK kernel, oracleasm-support can be found on the Linux install dvd but oracleasmlib can only be obtained from ULN. A customer requests an installation he has no ULN account but told sales to get one which will take a couple of days. Is there any way to proceed installation and obtain oracleasmlib for el6.x86_64 from another source or can the installation be done with the oracleasmlib-2.0.4-1.el5.x86_64.rpm package and updated afterwords. When using oracleasmlib-2.0.4-1.el5.x86_64.rpm for Linux 6 are there any disadvantages?
Edited by: user12005064 on 19.06.2012 14:11
You can always configure ASM without ASMLib. Some swear by it, I have never used it in 75+ clusters. (to be fair, ~50% of those were not on Linux which is the only platform you can use ASMLib.)
It appears by the fact that it is only included in OEL, that Oracle appears to be poised to EOL the product all together. Could be wrong, but that is what it appears. Therefore, if you can do the install without ASMLib, then I would recommend that path.
What SAN/shared storage are you going to be using?
Edited by: onedbguru on Jun 19, 2012 7:11 PM
thanks for the response. It is an EMC based SAN with PowerPath driver. Actually they have two SAN boxes one acting as backup. If the backup goes online the paritions have different device pathes. Thats why I thougt asmlib could be a good choice. I did ab testinstallation with oracleasmlib-2.0.4-1.el5.x86_64.rpm and OEL 6.1 and it worked. But for a production system I rather wait for the el6 asm rpm. It is a pity because starting with Linux 6 you can not test install Oracle software or just drive to a customer and make an installation even if it is just a 3K big rpm. You have to buy a support in order to use it. Thats why I first time interruped an installation of Oracle software at customer site. I confess it was my first Linux 6 cluster installation but the customer was not willing to switch to Linux 5. In my opinion they could have just put the rpm on the install CD.
So far as I can see there are two mayor changes starting from Linux 6: Even Redhat customers must use the Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel and its support. If you go with asmlib you need a support contract in order to install or get the binary.
But my question is still open and I think it is also interesting for others: Is it feasible to use oracleasmlib-2.0.4-1.el5.x86_64.rpm with OEL 6 and update it later AFTER going live? Maybe someone from Oracle can answer this.
Oracle ASMLib addresses specifics of the Linux kernel and besides disk management provides an alternative I/O path to improve CPU utilization and provide raw disk support. You don't have to use ASMLib and can use Device Multipath and Udev, but depending on your setup, ASMLib might provide better I/O management using less disk handles and easier device management.
As far as I can tell the Oracle ASMLIB package for el5 works fine under OL 6.2. Apparently there are no functional changes.
See Re: Release plans for oracleasm and RHEL 6? for more information.
It appears by the fact that it is only included in OEL, that Oracle appears to be poised to EOL the product all together.
Interesting thought, but I'd rather see a different case:
Red Hat undercuts Oracle with hidden Linux patches:
(There are lots of other links to the same or similar information)
I would consider this to be the reason why there is no ASMLib, OCFS2, etc. for RHEL 6.
Apparently Red Hat is whining that Oracle is stealing their customers. I would not be so sure who rips of whom. Oracle Linux provides free public yum access to patches and errata and also has its own kernel, based on the mainstream Linux kernel. In my opinion, Oracle Linux supports open source and free software more than RHEL.