Re: FRA
- From: Niall Litchfield <niall.litchfield@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: pioro1@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 21:07:18 +0000
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 8:25 PM, Marcin Przepiorowski <pioro1@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 1:34 AM, Jeremiah Wilton <jwilton@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> > On Friday, December 11, 2009, Roger Xu <wellmetus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> with RMAN retention policy and "delete obsolete", I think one can easily
> manage and delete old archivelogs and backups without FRA. Am I correct?
> Hi,
>
> As I understand you have a lot of space for your FRA - in that case
> there is no issue with space and
> I can agree that FRA is a good solution. But keep in mind that if your
> FRA is relative small (for example 1 backup plus 1 day of archive log)
> if something wrong happen to your backup and cleanup jobs you can hung
> database due to lack of space for archive logs.
>
I don't see how having insufficient resource to deal with a backup failure
affects the technology decision. If you only have space for 1 backup and 1
day of archlogs (your scenario) then what happens if something goes wrong
with a scripted backup. The only likely scenario that I could see would be
that you delete your existing backups before the failure leaves you with no
backup. This likely happens either way, the problem being not the FRA but
lack of space for recovery related files. (and yes I've been on a few sites
where you've pretty much had to take the calculated risk of deleting files
needed for recovery - usually archlogs - in order to get a good backup, not
nice. )
--
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
http://www.orawin.info
Other related posts:
