Re: RMAN Performance Maladies
- From: "Jared Still" <jkstill@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: MFontana@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 16:07:44 -0800
On 2/12/07, Michael Fontana <MFontana@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
We are NOT backing up to TAPE.
We are backing up to a SAN disk array (RAID5). This is what is
recommended as a compromise between performance and efficiency by our disk
storage management team.
We are using 4 channels, not 8, as someone had inferred.
That time does seem somewhat excessive when compared to SQL Backtrack.
I have not used SQL Backtrack for about 6 years, so it has undoubtedly
changed
since I have seen it.
If however it still works in the same way, it is a tool for managing a
catalog of
hot file backups. It puts the tablespaces in backup mode and copies the
files
to disk or tape. It's beauty has always been in that like RMAN, standard
restores
of a database are very simple (unless your indexes get corrupted in Legato).
What you have to remember about RMAN is that the standard backup is not
a file based backup - it is block based. There's a fair amount of overhead
involved,
so you cannot really compare your previous backup times to this.
You could try setting up a file backup in RMAN ( I have not done this) and
compare that to SQL Backtrack.
--
Jared Still
Certifiable Oracle DBA and Part Time Perl Evangelist
Other related posts:
