Re: RMAN Compession (Again)

"Don Seiler" <don_at_seiler.us> wrote in message news:pan.2003.11.10.22.49.58.907975_at_seiler.us...
> On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 22:11:14 +0100, Sybrand Bakker wrote:
>
> > Why continue riding a T-Ford, when you have a free Rolls-Royce (Rman)
> > delivered to your door.
> > One day you will regret you didn't use RMAN. That day however it will
> > be too late.
>
> Well I have to find a solution that would allow me to compress the piece
> files as they come off the line. This is a necessity.
>
> The HOST command would run gzip after the backup is complete. It is
> already too late then as the backup will die. Am I misunderstanding
> RMAN's use of HOST?

Don,

Going back to your original post. You mentioned the backup getting to 100+ GB and running out of space.

Have you considered doing incremental backups with RMAN??

That only backs up those blocks which have changed since the last backup (with various rules about the incremental level to determine which original backup is consulted to work out what's changed).

You would still need a full backup on a regular basis to provide the "baseline" against which the incremental deltas are compared. So it may be of no use to you.

But it would be a shame to turn your back on RMAN, because you'd miss out on such wonders as block-level recovery, corruption checking during the backup, automated fixing of corruption detected during a backup, backups done in parallel, no clobbering of LGWR during the hot backup, and so on.

100GB of disk space can't be that expensive, can it??

Regards
HJR Received on Mon Nov 10 2003 - 21:21:21 CST