Path: newssvr20.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssrv26.news.prodigy.com.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Don Seiler Subject: Re: RMAN Compession (Again) User-Agent: Pan/0.14.2 (This is not a psychotic episode. It's a cleansing moment of clarity.) Message-ID: Newsgroups: comp.databases.oracle.server References: <3FAFAF2D.A81E3A4A@remove_spam.peasland.com> <3FAFBCC5.712C14A9@remove_spam.peasland.com> <3fb055c5$0$3790$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 37 NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.40.97.26 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: newssrv26.news.prodigy.com 1068580986 ST000 206.40.97.26 (Tue, 11 Nov 2003 15:03:06 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 15:03:06 EST Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com X-UserInfo1: Q[R_PJONQBSUSTLXBJJ@NFP@XB]BAAXOGHTVOBPLAH[\BPIB_NVUAH_[BL[\IRKIANGGJBFNJF_DOLSCENSY^U@FRFUEXR@KFXYDBPWBCDQJA@X_DCBHXR[C@\EOKCJLED_SZ@RMWYXYWE_P@\\GOIW^@SYFFSWHFIXMADO@^[ADPRPETLBJ]RDGENSKQQZN Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 20:03:06 GMT Xref: newssvr20.news.prodigy.com comp.databases.oracle.server:247461 On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 14:21:21 +1100, Howard J. Rogers wrote: > Going back to your original post. You mentioned the backup getting to 100+ > GB and running out of space. > > Have you considered doing incremental backups with RMAN?? > > That only backs up those blocks which have changed since the last backup > (with various rules about the incremental level to determine which original > backup is consulted to work out what's changed). > > You would still need a full backup on a regular basis to provide the > "baseline" against which the incremental deltas are compared. So it may be > of no use to you. Yes I have considered it but the fact that I still need the full, or level 0, backup brings me back to the original problem. > > But it would be a shame to turn your back on RMAN, because you'd miss out on > such wonders as block-level recovery, corruption checking during the backup, > automated fixing of corruption detected during a backup, backups done in > parallel, no clobbering of LGWR during the hot backup, and so on. I agree. > > 100GB of disk space can't be that expensive, can it?? > You are probably right. What I plan to do, and didn't mention earlier, was get a new hotbackup (not RMAN) script in place so we can be running Oracle9i by the end of the year. Then when the dust settles I'll work on an RMAN solution. Let me know what you think.