Path: newssvr20.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!rip!news.webusenet.com!peer01.cox.net!cox.net!newshosting.com!news-xfer2.atl.newshosting.com!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!newsgate.cistron.nl!news2.euro.net!newshub1.home.nl!home.nl!not-for-mail From: Frank Newsgroups: comp.databases.oracle.server Subject: Re: RMAN Compession (Again) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 22:40:20 +0100 Organization: @Home Benelux Lines: 53 Message-ID: References: <3FAFAF2D.A81E3A4A@remove_spam.peasland.com> <3FAFBCC5.712C14A9@remove_spam.peasland.com> <3fb055c5$0$3790$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au> Reply-To: fbortel@nescape.net NNTP-Posting-Host: cc28855-a.hnglo1.ov.home.nl Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: news2.tilbu1.nb.home.nl 1068586341 16829 217.121.193.81 (11 Nov 2003 21:32:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@home.nl NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 21:32:21 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en In-Reply-To: Xref: newssvr20.news.prodigy.com comp.databases.oracle.server:247471 Don Seiler wrote: > 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. > Go RMAN - it's fast! I get a 30G 11.5 apps db backed up to tape in about half an hour - full backup, mind you, inclusive archived redo logs file (about 3.5G) Let RMAN decide what do remove from disk; check out the 'report obsolete xx' option, output to report, run grep, sed and run the script to delete what is not needed anymore, from either disk, or tape. -- Regards, Frank van Bortel