Re: Are Oracle DBAs trivialized?

From: DA Morgan <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu>
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 10:07:06 -0700
Message-ID: <1113757400.964127@yasure>

Jim Smith wrote:

>> Here are some recent examples ...
>>
>> - I had to pull teeth to get my current company to switch to RMAN.

>
> Why should they switch to RMAN? The currently backups presumably work
> fine, and there will be a significant cost in terms of DBA (and other
> time) in making the switch and testing it.
>
> Do the benefits of RMAN outweigh these costs (and the risks associated
> with the disruption of something as fundamental as backups?) Almost
> certainly, but some figures in terms of DBA time saved, shorter backup
> windows, faster restores etc, would help the argument.

You lack of experience and knowledge shine through the above like a laser beam on a dark night. What cost or risk in implementing RMAN? RMAN has been around for generations of Oracle and it is now the best, safest, fastest, and least cost back up strategy available.

Oracle has put forth a no-brainer tool, no brainer in the same way that implementing LMTs and UNDO are no-brainers. I've yet to see a single argument put forward not to move to RMAN if it is available for the version being discussed.

-- 
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)

Received on Sun Apr 17 2005 - 12:07:06 CDT