Re: Triple Mirroring vs. Hot backups + Double mirroring

From: David Lewis <David.W.Lewis_at_DaytonOh.attgis.com>
Date: 1995/12/15
Message-ID: <DJnBun.6zn_at_corsair.daytonoh.attgis.com>#1/1


I've restored our production system twice from hot backups. 2.5 hours to backup, 8 - 24 hours to restore. When restoring from hot backup, have to recreate everything, apply archive logs, reset logs, etc. I've been with support around the world one night, Orlando, San Fran, Sydney, London, and back to Orlando.
I wish I had disk mirroring in triplicate!!! I think it depends on what an acceptable down time is for your business. ==========Mahesh Vallampati, 12/12/95========== badri_at_cc.gatech.edu (badri) writes:
>I would like to invite comments/suggestions on the following:
>
> Instead of using up 16Gb per mirror and triple mirroring,
>why not double mirror and use hot backups? What are the trade-offs?
>On one side, it saves us 16Gb of disk space. I understand that
>recovery is more tedious with hot backups. Any other problems?
Received on Fri Dec 15 1995 - 00:00:00 CET

Original text of this message