From oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org Mon Jun 28 14:14:27 2004 Return-Path: Received: from air189.startdedicated.com (root@localhost) by orafaq.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i5SJE2X14747 for ; Mon, 28 Jun 2004 14:14:12 -0500 X-ClientAddr: 206.53.239.180 Received: from turing.freelists.org (freelists-180.iquest.net [206.53.239.180]) by air189.startdedicated.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i5SJDq614710 for ; Mon, 28 Jun 2004 14:14:02 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id EBC0372CB10; Mon, 28 Jun 2004 13:56:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 24897-72; Mon, 28 Jun 2004 13:56:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 1933872C307; Mon, 28 Jun 2004 13:56:35 -0500 (EST) Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list oracle-l); Mon, 28 Jun 2004 13:55:11 -0500 (EST) X-Original-To: oracle-l@freelists.org Delivered-To: oracle-l@freelists.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 521A672C3AC for ; Mon, 28 Jun 2004 13:55:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 24601-70 for ; Mon, 28 Jun 2004 13:55:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail.sagelogix.com (unknown [69.15.85.3]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id C265672C39E for ; Mon, 28 Jun 2004 13:55:10 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail.sagelogix.com (Postfix, from userid 16) id 65B83A822C; Mon, 28 Jun 2004 13:14:28 -0600 (MDT) Received: from ocs.sagelogix.com (ocs.sagelogix.com [192.168.25.20]) by mail.sagelogix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2EC5A84B1 for ; Mon, 28 Jun 2004 13:14:02 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sl129.sagelogix.com by ocs.sagelogix.com with ESMTP id 7373231088450126; Mon, 28 Jun 2004 13:15:26 -0600 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.1.4.030702.0 Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 13:17:20 -0600 Subject: Re: Server-managed vs storage-managed backup/recovery? From: Tim Gorman To: Message-ID: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on mail.sagelogix.com X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=3.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.63 X-Spam-Level: X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at freelists.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-archive-position: 3862 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org Errors-To: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org X-original-sender: tim@sagelogix.com Precedence: normal Reply-To: oracle-l@freelists.org X-list: oracle-l X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at freelists.org John, Thanks so much for the reply! I'm trying to find the middle-ground between RMAN and the mirror-split methods. Right now, my approach is to make use of the CATALOG command to register a mirror-split as a DATAFILECOPY and then back the DATAFILECOPY off to tape using the BACKUP DATAFILECOPY command. This would allow RMAN to check for corrupted blocks, thus achieving the best of both worlds, but I've got a lot of testing to do, and I was wondering if anyone had used this already? Thanks! -Tim on 6/24/04 3:37 PM, John Kanagaraj at john.kanagaraj@hds.com wrote: > Tim, > > We use the the 'split mirror' hot-backup for our large Apps database. The > main reasons are (a) Keep backup I/O off the 'live' copy (b) Keep a copy of > the Database 'on-disk' for immediate recovery should a disk disaster strike > on the live copy. (c) We don't have to really bother about the backup window > as long as one cycle doesn't step into the next. (d) Clones are simply a > matter of FTP and archive log application. [Of course, storage $$ isn't an > issue here, if you know what I mean!] > > Hth, > John Kanagaraj <>< > DB Soft Inc > Phone: 408-970-7002 (W) > > Listen to great, commercial-free christian music 24x7x365 at > http://www.klove.com > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org >> [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of tim@sagelogix.com >> Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2004 9:02 AM >> To: oracle-l@freelists.org >> Subject: Server-managed vs storage-managed backup/recovery? >> >> >> All, >> >> I see a lot of IT shops opting for using the various >> ?mirror-split? technologies for performing database backups, >> as opposed to using tape-management software (i.e. Veritas, >> Legato, Tivoli, etc) or RMAN. To make a long story short, I >> see this as IT management endorsing the concept of >> storage-managed storage as opposed to the concept of >> server-managed storage. Not a bad solution, makes a lot of >> sense in a lot of ways. Lots of good arguments in favor of >> storage-managed storage, as long as the services on the server >> are simple. However, as the existence of this list attests, >> database-based applications tend to be complex and laden with options. >> >> I tend to believe that there is more to the recoverabilt than >> simply getting the data to tape (or from tape) as quickly as >> possible, namely: >> >> - partial database recoveries >> - point-in-time recoveries >> - not backing up READ ONLY tablespaces as frequently as READ >> WRITE tablespaces >> - detecting corruption in datafiles and archived redo log files >> - validating backups, validating restores, validating recoverability >> - verifying recoverability >> - reporting and analysis on backup and restore performance >> >> All of these are things that RMAN does, but ?mirror-split? >> techniques make difficult. Still, for shops that have bought >> into one or more of the various ?mirror-split? options, I find >> it difficult to try to argue them away from it. At least, the >> arguments are difficult until serious recovery problems have >> occurred and the huge range of options offered by Oracle have >> been constrained by the use of ?mirror-split? backups. >> >> So, in the spirit of ?join them rather than beat them?, has >> anyone managed to combine RMAN with ?split-pair? techniques >> (i.e. EMC ?TimeFinder? and BCVs, Veritas ?FlashSnap?, Hitachi >> pair-splits, etc)? >> >> I?ve thought about using the RMAN ?catalog? command to add >> DATAFILECOPYs to the catalog following a ?mirror-split?, but >> RMAN then tends to try to read those splits during restore >> operations. Also, the fact of having created a DATAFILECOPY >> using a mirror split means that RMAN has not been able to >> check the file for corrupted blocks, an important piece of >> functionality to lose. >> >> I?m also aware of the PROXY operations in RMAN but have not >> used them. Anyone know if this functionality integrates into >> the ?mirror-split? techniques? >> >> Thanks in advance for any and all information! >> >> -Tim ---------------------------------------------------------------- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request@freelists.org put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line. -- Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/ FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html -----------------------------------------------------------------