RE: Why I don't like RMAN repositories

From: <>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 10:12:01 -0500
Message-ID: <>

 Yes...exactly :)
 And in my opinion its is also not a matter of if I like it or not. Having a catalog provides you additional flexibility and convenience - which comes at the "cost" of a lightweight database. That provides you with additional options and ease in case you loose your copy of your controlfile.
Can you work without it - yes of course. But, as Mark said if for any reason you loose the string or the belt then you don't have the suspenders to prevent your back side from being exposed. At a personal level - unless you are religiously against it I am not sure why you wouldn't use it.

-----Original Message-----
[] On Behalf Of Tim Gorman Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2013 10:04 AM To:
Subject: Re: Why I don't like RMAN repositories

Coming late to the discussion, not sure if anyone else has made this point...

Having an RMAN repository (a.k.a. recovery catalog, etc) is belt and suspenders (or belt and braces for many). There is always a "recovery catalog" in the target database's control files, so you've always got a belt to prevent your trousers from falling. If you don't set CONTROL_FILE_RECORD_KEEP_TIME to at least 21, then it's more cheap string than a belt, but it's a belt.

A recovery catalog is a replicated copy of the recovery catalog with more history, thus suspenders/braces in addition to the belt.

It is not technical merit, but rather personal/corporate choice, that determines whether one wears one or both.

On 12/10/2013 6:18 AM, Dave Morgan wrote:
> Hi All,
> First off, if you are not properly backing up your control files
> then you
> will find yourself in trouble sooner or later. A repository will not
> help in that situation.
> If you are backing them up properly then you do not need a repository.
> Norman Dunbar wrote:
> > I'm intrigued though, as to why you are not keen?
> Because it is extra work and cost for little to no purpose in many
> Jared said "there is no good reason not to" Uhh, to my mind that is
not a
> "good reason to do it"
> Wayne Smith wrote:
> > As I recall, it simplifies the occasion when the app owners say to
> restore
> > the database to day x, and after you do it, they call back and say
> they
> > really meant day x+1.
> Why do I need a repository to do that? Apart from the fact that
> production dbs
> do not get "rolled back".
> jay Hostetter wrote:
> > There are some TSPITR limitations if you are NOT using a recovery
> catalog. See the Backup and Recovery Users's Guide.
> > A catalog is also required in a Dataguard environment (see note
> 1362501.1).
> > Having said that, I don't use the recovery catalog for my test/dev
> databases. I adjust the control_file_record_keep_time to 30 days.
> Ahh, now we have a real reason. Of course TSPITRs are not done in a
> production environment at least not mine.
> Like you I adjust the keep time, however, I do not backup test or dev

> databases. The "Why I don't like DataGuard thread will follow" :)
> So, are there any compelling reasons to use a repository in a small
> shop with 1-3 databases?
> Because without it, my sysadmins follow a 10 step procedure to do
> recovery if I'm not there.
> Dave


Please visit our website at 
for important disclosures and information about our e-mail 
policies. For your protection, please do not transmit orders 
or instructions by e-mail or include account numbers, Social 
Security numbers, credit card numbers, passwords, or other 
personal information.
Received on Tue Dec 10 2013 - 16:12:01 CET

Original text of this message