Re: RMAN questions...

From: Howard J. Rogers <hjr_at_dizwell.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 08:51:25 +1100
Message-ID: <3fb2ab60$0$20496$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>

"Brian Peasland" <dba_at_remove_spam.peasland.com> wrote in message news:3FB2A8CB.DA7173CC_at_remove_spam.peasland.com...
> > Assuming all other things are equal (I understand the other benefits
> > of RMAN such as block corruption detection, backing up only changed
> > blocks, etc.), which one _should_ take longer to restore?
>
> Applying incrementals should be faster than using only archived redo
> logs. Otherwise, why do incrementals?

Because the *backup* takes less time. And less space.

I'm not saying that using incrementals will make recoveries longer (see my other reply), but *even if they did*, there would be use for incrementals from the point of view of needing to perform a backup in a particular maintenance window, or with only a certain amount of free space on your backup device.

Regards
HJR Received on Wed Nov 12 2003 - 15:51:25 CST