Re: RMAN Performance Maladies

On 2/12/07, Michael Fontana <MFontana_at_verio.net> wrote:
>
>
> We are NOT backing up to TAPE.
>
> We are backing up to a SAN disk array (RAID5). This is what is
> recommended as a compromise between performance and efficiency by our disk
> storage management team.
>
> We are using 4 channels, not 8, as someone had inferred.
>
>

That time does seem somewhat excessive when compared to SQL Backtrack.

I have not used SQL Backtrack for about 6 years, so it has undoubtedly changed
since I have seen it.

If however it still works in the same way, it is a tool for managing a catalog of
hot file backups. It puts the tablespaces in backup mode and copies the files
to disk or tape. It's beauty has always been in that like RMAN, standard restores
of a database are very simple (unless your indexes get corrupted in Legato).

What you have to remember about RMAN is that the standard backup is not a file based backup - it is block based. There's a fair amount of overhead involved,
so you cannot really compare your previous backup times to this.

You could try setting up a file backup in RMAN ( I have not done this) and compare that to SQL Backtrack.

-- 
Jared Still
Certifiable Oracle DBA and Part Time Perl Evangelist

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l