Re: Flashback database versus RMAN

We use RMAN for all our backups but recently we had a failover situation with one of our DG primary databases. We were able to flashback the original primary to the SCN where the failover occurred and start it up as the standby (with a few other steps). Then we switched back seamlessly. It was very handy.

Kevin

On Wed, 2008-02-20 at 12:41 +0000, Niall Litchfield wrote:
> We have a training environment that is a copy of production with some
> setup for training courses done. Flashback database after the course
> is over is much nicer than re-clone. It strikes me that it might make
> a good "poor man's Real Application Testing" environment as well - at
> least for the what-if type testing that RAT enables.
>
> Niall
>
>
> On Feb 19, 2008 5:51 PM, Brian Lucas <moabrivers_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Outside of reinstantiating a primary database after a failover
> in Data Guard, are there any compelling reasons to use
> Flashback database versus RMAN for a 10gr2 database that's
> only about 100GB in size? It definitely seems like RMAN still
> holds the advantage.
>
> I like flashback query and flashback table but I'm having a
> hard time swallowing the need for flashback database.
>
>
>
> --
> Niall Litchfield
> Oracle DBA
> http://www.orawin.info

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