Re: Backups versus snapshots
- From: Keith Moore <kmoore@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: k3nnyp@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 17:52:50 -0500
Hmmm, taking a snapshot of the data guard database as well would eliminate some
of the issues. And no solution is 100% guaranteed to not have data loss. Even
with backups you can lose data if the database needs to be restored, the
archive logs are also gone and some of those archive logs have not been backed
up or transferred/applied to the standby.
To be clear, the snapshots are not physical copies of the database. They only
track the differences between the database at the time of the snapshot and the
current time. So if the database goes poof then the snapshot is gone as well.
When we asked the EMC guy about this, his response was…well, if that happens
there is this website called monster.com where you can post your resume. I want
to make it clear that he was not proposing this as an alternative to backups,
just discussing the technology and how it worked.
Keith
On Sep 18, 2014, at 1:33 PM, Kenny Payton <k3nnyp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I would not recommend this approach without replicating the snapshots to a
> separate array.
>
> Another option is something I'm doing, take snapshots of your physical
> dataguard database and use it for your production database backups. You can
> register the files with rman as image file backups. You can also use the
> shipped archived logs during your recovery. I've got around 60T of database
> being backed up this way and will more than double that next year.
>
> You need to periodically scan your production copy for block corruption as
> Kevin mentioned.
>
> Kenny
>
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
