On Tue, 22 Apr 2003 14:06:03 +0200, Anthony Hogan wrote
(in message <3EA5302B.FF88FBE5_at_iespana.es>):
> Ronald wrote:
>>
>> "Jake" <oraclenews_at_heyjay.com> wrote in message
>> news:<zPecnXCqo5EL2zmjXTWc-g_at_speakeasy.net>...
>>> In 2000 and 2001 (via Google archives) there were some lengthy threads
>>> about
>>> RMAN, and it seemed the jury was undecided. I'm wondering which way (if
>>> any) the news group regulars (and non regulars) have leaned? Scripts or
>>> RMAN? RMAN with a Catalog or without?
>>>
>>> I'm comfortable with scripts (and played with early RMAN, and was left
>>> wanting). But the product is 3+ years old and is (probably) better.
>>
>> I would go for rman and use that with a catalog. It works very well
>> with tsm but if such infrastructure is not present I would still use
>> it for disk backups. Some customers prefer scripts because they say
>> their dba's don't know about rman. In that case I advice to do some
>> education on the topic. Things like database cloning works very fine
>> using rman.
>> Don't forget the first rule: backup when you make physical changes to
>> your database. It makes recovery easier.
> Ronald,
> By backup do you mean a non-RMAN backup? If so, I would be interested in
> the reasoning behind the comment.
No, I meant backups using rman. On some sites the prefer for curious reasons
non-rman backup scripts. I hope this clears things up.
--
With kind regards,
Ronald
http://ronr.nl/unix-dba
Received on Tue Apr 22 2003 - 14:00:47 CDT
