Re: RMAN or Hot Backup
Date: Sun, 5 Apr 2009 22:00:53 -0700 (PDT)
On Apr 3, 3:17 am, johnbhur..._at_sbcglobal.net wrote:
> On Apr 2, 8:41 pm, jgar the jorrible <joel-ga..._at_home.com> wrote:
> > I've seen a few problems with recovery, and am kind of surprised you
> > haven't. But I can't think of anything that could be resolved by a
> > cold backup - if you have to go that far, you've lost data.
> Ummm no "if" you have archivelogs past the cold backup to the ( or
> very close to the ) current time you can apply these and forward
> recovery from a cold backup ... that's been a valid technique for all
> the time I have been invovled with oracle.
Well yes, it's possible that a hot backup got screwed up and a
cold backup could have applied all the arcs, but the same could be said
of a hot backup. What I meant to say was give an example of a cold backup
working where a hot backup wouldn't. Now, I know in some versions a shutdown
abort with some LOB configuration I forget, could screw you, but whether you went
back to a cold or earlier hot backup, you still lose. And of course, if you have need
for some arc that no longer exists, you're screwed either way.
> > rcyoung, I challenge you - give an example where a cold backup
> > resolved a problem that couldn't be resolved by a hot backup.
> Joel he made a valid point but many people don't have disk space to
> also hold cold backup(s) or enough downtime to get them refreshed on a
> ( whatever that means ) viable basis.
As The Cure said "never enough, never enough."
I hope I was clear enough there I'm looking for an example where a
saved what a hot backup wouldn't have. I suspect there could be a situation like
I mentioned above with the abort, except somehow the bad log got archived so you
couldn't get past it on a recovery - perhaps archiving already started as an abort happens.
I also suspect older versions may have some rbs corruption examples, but can't think what they
might be now.
Anyways, the current versions are perfect and have no bugs. Why is my tongue purple?
-- _at_home.com is bogus. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/06/technology/business-computing/06blue.htmlReceived on Mon Apr 06 2009 - 00:00:53 CDT