RE: incremental backups
- From: "Allen, Brandon" <Brandon.Allen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <ryan_gaffuri@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2007 14:19:42 -0700
He's right that it is one more file and it takes longer, but everything
is a trade-off. Full backups take more time, more backup space and more
network bandwidth if you're backing up over a network than incrementals,
plus require much more I/O on your production database (compared to
incrementals with change-tracking file in 10g). Applying an incremental
will certainly be faster than applying a bunch of redo, but not as fast
as starting with a more recent full backup. In 10g there is also the
option of incrementally updated backups - a hybrid that is probably the
best of both worlds if I understand it correctly but I haven't actually
tested it yet. I wouldn't worry too much about the incremental backup
getting corrupted, shouldn't be a frequent occurrence - not any more
likely than your full backup or archive log backups getting corrupted.
I've been using incrementals for years and love them.
Regards,
Brandon
Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message or
attachments hereto. Please advise immediately if you or your employer do not
consent to Internet email for messages of this kind. Opinions, conclusions and
other information in this message that do not relate to the official business
of this company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it.
Other related posts:
