RE: [Spam] Incremental backups

From: Mercadante, Thomas F \(LABOR\) <Thomas.Mercadante_at_labor.state.ny.us>
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 09:30:29 -0500
Message-ID: <ABB9D76E187C5146AB5683F5A07336FFE0891F@EXCNYSM0A1AJ.nysemail.nyenet>

Mike,

To me, and the place where I am working now, incremental backups before 10g do not make sense. While the amount of stuff that gets backed up is smaller, the time that rman runs does not change. A full backup and an incremental backup takes the same amount of time to run. So what am I getting for this? I might as well take a full backup.

With 10g, incremental backups and the new change tracking file are a different story - something to investigate. The change tracking file keeps track of blocks that have changed within the database. Rman then uses this file to only back those blocks up during an incremental backup. This should be much faster.

So until I get a 10g database running in production, incrementals are a no-go for me. They just don't make sense.

Tom

This transmission may contain confidential, proprietary, or privileged information which is intended solely for use by the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, dissemination, copying or distribution of this transmission or its attachments is strictly prohibited. In addition, unauthorized access to this transmission may violate federal or State law, including the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1985. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete the transmission and its attachments.

From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org] On Behalf Of Kline.Michael
Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2006 9:14 AM To: oracle-l_at_freelists.org
Subject: [Spam] Incremental backups

Anyone have a sort of "working policy" at which point incremental backups are worth considering?

Our system is still quite fast, and for the most part taking full is not that long and means we only need one copy or one set of files to restore.

I would think, and yes I know it varies, that there is probably a size where it's really worth considering, like perhaps 1TB or so, maybe as low as 500Gb.

I do have a couple of warehouses that I need to check what gets touched each day and they sound like very good candidates for this. We'd most likely do a full around the weekend, and do incremental cumulatives between that and the next. That way we only would need the base and the latest cumulative.

Michael Kline
Database Administration
SunTrust Banks, Inc.
Mail Code TOC-7505

1030 Wilmer Avenue
Richmond, Va. 23227
Tel: 804.261.9446 Net: 643.9446

Cell: 804.744.1545
michael.kline_at_suntrust.com <mailto:michael.kline_at_suntrust.com>

Seeing beyond Money(sm)

LEGAL DISCLAIMER
The information transmitted is intended solely for the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email in error please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.

SunTrust and Seeing beyond money are federally registered service marks of SunTrust Banks, Inc.
[ST:XCL]

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

Received on Wed Dec 06 2006 - 08:30:29 CST