home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!gossip.pyramid.com!pyramid!infmx!davek
- From: davek@informix.com (David Kosenko)
- Newsgroups: comp.databases.informix
- Subject: Re: backup differences between SE and OL - question.
- Message-ID: <1993Jan21.174647.21842@informix.com>
- Date: 21 Jan 93 17:46:47 GMT
- References: <1jhm6vINN40p@emory.mathcs.emory.edu>
- Sender: news@informix.com (Usenet News)
- Organization: Informix Software, Inc.
- Lines: 28
-
- Will Hartung - Master Rallyeist writes:
- >
- >The 'tbunload' is the only real solution. But, you can get away with
- >not swapping a billion tapes for every backup (assuming your tables
- >aren't enormous that is). The trick here is to tbunload to the "no
- >rewind" device of the tape, and just stick several back to back. I
- >imagine that this will bring problems if your tables have a chance of
- >spanning the tape. Discovering what happens then is an exercise for
- >the reader. Our tables aren't 2 Gig in size, so I'm not worried.
-
- DO NOT attempt to do this with regular archives, though. We require
- rewind in that case, because we read the header on the tape to insure
- that the tape has been switched for multi-volume archives.
-
- As far as I know, this is not an issue with tbunload.
-
- >It would be nice to be able to recover a specific DATABASE from an
- >OnLine Level 0 archive, though.
-
- You will see this in the 6.0 release.
-
- Dave
-
- --
- Disclaimer: These opinions are not those of Informix Software, Inc.
- **************************************************************************
- "I look back with some satisfaction on what an idiot I was when I was 25,
- but when I do that, I'm assuming I'm no longer an idiot." - Andy Rooney
-