Re: incremental import/export

Anurag Varma wrote:
> hpuxrac wrote:
> > ehilah wrote:
> > > Is incremental import/export supported on oracle 10g ?
> > > I found no ref in documentation but if I launch exp help=y i can see
> > > inctype parameter. I don't want to use it but a customer asked me about
> > > that function.
> > > I remember that it worked only with full export, is it correct ? and I
> > > remember that for importing you have to import first the full import and
> > > then the incremental database, is it correct ?
> > > I remember even that you can import instead only a table for the
> > > incremental export because for any table modified in the incremental you
> > > find drop and recreate istruction and then all the data. Is all this
> > > correct ?
> > > thanks in advance
> > > Pier Paolo
> >
> > It should still be viable in 10g. Although oracle is promoting and for
> > good reason usage of the datapump import and export all the "good old"
> > functionality import and export provided will still be around for a
> > long time.
> >
> > It's been a real long time since I used the incremental stuff but yes
> > as you noted it works in conjunction with the full parameter. The
> > posssible values that INCTYPE can have are COMPLETE CUMULATIVE and
> > INCREMENTAL.
>
> Incremental export is no longer supported as of Oracle 9.0.1
> (obsolete).
>
> See metalink note: 178968.1
>
> and see the following error which is produced if you still insist on
> using the INCTYPE
> parameter:
> oerr exp 41
> 00041, 00000, "INCTYPE parameter is obsolete"
> // *Cause: Export encountered the INCTYPE parameter when parsing
> Export
> // options. Incremental Exports are no longer supported.
> // *Action: Consult the Oracle Backup and Recovery guide.
> // Export will attempt to continue.
>
>
> Anurag

Looks like it's not a 10g thing then it's a 9.0 change ... but it looks like the export run still attempts to execute as full ... shows an error then continues ??? Weird

On 10.2 if you do an exp help=y it's still listed as a parameter ...

Who likes consistency anyway? Received on Mon Jan 15 2007 - 15:40:08 CST