| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 539.1 | no, SAP drives the saves | DECWET::EVANS | NSR Engineering | Mon Mar 31 1997 12:56 | 2 |
| SAP R/3 drives the saves/restores, so it determines what is to be operated
upon.
|
| 539.2 | | SANITY::LEMONS | And we thank you for your support. | Mon Mar 31 1997 13:19 | 8 |
| Gotcha. I remember reading that NetWorker is just the media manager in
this SAP/NetWorker partnership. That said, can anyone offer an opinion
on the idea of SAP incremental, differntial and full saves? From one
source, I'm hearing that we should/must back up a 60 GB database every
night (a 'full', I'm guessing), and I rebel at this.
Thanks!
tl
|
| 539.3 | | DECWET::FARLEE | Insufficient Virtual um...er.... | Tue Apr 01 1997 10:33 | 9 |
| Well, I can tell you the Oracle hasn't YET gotten it through their
heads that incremental backups are a good thing.
EBU has two flavors of backup (to my knowledge): Online full and Offline full.
I doubt that SAP will be able to provide something that the underlying database
vendor does not.
Kevin
|
| 539.4 | (FYI) Oracle 8 has incrementals (I'm told) | DECWET::EVANS | NSR Engineering | Tue Apr 01 1997 13:11 | 3 |
| and I'm certain it will be implemented as only Oracle will do it.
stay tuned...
|
| 539.5 | | SANITY::LEMONS | And we thank you for your support. | Tue Apr 01 1997 13:14 | 12 |
| I really appreciate this insight, thanks. So, for now, I'll just plan
on full backups only.
Any opinions on whether I _must_ do a full backup every night? I'm
still trying to learn about SAP's database capabilities regarding
bacukp and recovery. I gather there are 'redo logs', which are
transaction logs.
Thoughts?
Thanks!
tl
|
| 539.6 | no savings | USCTR1::ASCHER | Dave Ascher | Sun Apr 06 1997 12:17 | 11 |
|
Oracle databases in SAP R/3 consist of a bunch of pretty big
datafiles... We're talking 1/2 to several gigabytes each file.
Every time the db gets updated EVERY ONE of the db files gets
modified with a sequence number.
An 'incremental' backup is going to back up every modified file.
Therefor, there is no savings in doing an 'incremental' rather
than a full backup.
|
| 539.7 | | KAHLUA::LEMONS | And we thank you for your support. | Mon Apr 07 1997 07:13 | 8 |
| Dave
I was looking for a database incremental. I know that an operating
system level backup scoops up every file that has been changed. I look
for a database backup to look inside the backup files, and scoop up
only the records inside the database that have changed.
tl
|
| 539.8 | Could be on the way... | USCTR1::ASCHER | Dave Ascher | Fri Apr 18 1997 12:01 | 20 |
| re: <<< Note 539.7 by KAHLUA::LEMONS "And we thank you for your support." >>>
< I was looking for a database incremental. I know that an operating
< system level backup scoops up every file that has been changed. I look
< for a database backup to look inside the backup files, and scoop up
< only the records inside the database that have changed.
How would you expect oracle to figure out which records have
changed since the last backup? or since a point in time? They
carry a whole lot of overhead already in their db but a record
by record timestamp is a bit much, don't you think? How many
records do you think you have in that 180Gig db anyway?
I don't think this is impossible, but I will be impressed when
they come out with it and it doesn't suck up quite a bit of
cpu and time to perform the selection of records to back up.
|
| 539.9 | | SANITY::LEMONS | And we thank you for your support. | Fri Apr 18 1997 13:57 | 7 |
| Hi Dave
Yep, adding a time stamp to each record is too much. Yep, Oracle V8,
in field test, has incremental backup capability. How they did it, I
don't know. Check it out at http://www.oracle.com.
tl
|