Martin Klier


Oracle 11g unable to extend datafile but ASM disk group shows free space

Sometimes Oracle Database 11gR2 complains about not being able to extend a (lob) segment with ORA-1691, but ASM monitoring based on USABLE_FILE_MB did not fire. Adding a new data file fails with ASM ORA-15041. I was under the impression this behaviour of ASM deserved some explanation.


Database Alert Log complains with ORA-1691:

ORA-1691: unable to extend lobsegment MYUSER.SYS_LOB0013128030C00003$$ 
  by 128 in tablespace USERS
ORA-1691: unable to extend lobsegment MYUSER.SYS_LOB0013128030C00003$$ 
  by 8192 in tablespace USERS

Ok, a quick look comparing dba_segments and the tablespace size – it’s full. So let’s extend it with one more datafile:

SQL> alter tablespace USERS add datafile size 2G autoextend on next 1G maxsize 32G;
 alter tablespace IWACS add datafile size 2G autoextend on next 1G maxsize 32G
 FEHLER in Zeile 1:
 ORA-01119: Fehler bei der Erstellung der Datenbankdatei '+ORADATA'
 ORA-17502: ksfdcre:4 konnte Datei +ORADATA nicht erstellen
 ORA-15041: diskgroup "ORADATA" space exhausted

Uh-oh, ORA-15041? But as I well know, the customer is monitoring FREE_MB and USABLE_FILE_MB in v$asm_diskgroup…? Maybe something nasty is going on, let’s check if ASM has to work on balancing:

SQL> select * from v$asm_operation;
no rows selected

What’s the status of diskgroup +ORADATA? (I removed uninvolved ones)

ASMCMD [+] > lsdg
 State Type Rebal Sector Block AU Total_MB Free_MB Req_mir_free_MB 
  Usable_file_MB Offline_disks Voting_files Name
 MOUNTED EXTERN N 512 4096 1048576 2506752 344640 0 344640 0 N ORADATA/

Status of the disks:

ASMCMD [+] > lsdsk -k
 Total_MB Free_MB OS_MB Name Failgroup Failgroup_Type Library Label UDID 
  Product Redund Path
 2097152 344629 2097152 ORADATA_0000 ORADATA_0000 REGULAR System UNKNOWN 
 409600 11 409600 ORADATA_0001 ORADATA_0001 REGULAR System UNKNOWN 

So what happens here?

The technical term is “imbalanced space distribution”. The above diskgroup is of type EXTERNAL, meaning more or less that ASM does an evenly distribution our user data over both disks. And since it’s not just concatenation, this means that disks have to be the same size! But we have one with 2T and the other disk has just 400GB. Too bad.

A stuck rebalance operation could well have caused a similar problem, but as we have seen, this was not the case.

Obviously, after finding out the above myself and now knowing what to look for, I found a pretty good MOS note, explainig the whole thing:

Real-life Solution

Not trivial here, since the storage backend was not able to supply us with LUNs bigger than 2TB – and this seemed to be the initial reason for the different sizes: Somebody just “extended” the 2TB initial disk by 400GB…

In this case, we added two new LUNs with 1.5 TB in size each, and removed the others – all in one step:

SQL> alter diskgroup ORADATA add disk '/dev/ORADATA3','/dev/ORADATA4' 
  drop disk ORADATA_0000,ORADATA_0001;

By the way: That’s one of my reasons to favour ASM: You can migrate to new LUNs (or even whole new storage clusters) with an one-liner, and perfectly under full pressure.

I like it! 🙂

My COLLABORATE16 look-at’s – an aftermath
Oracle Automatic Big Table Caching – an improvement, not a fix

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.