Re: Backup and Recovery and DR - RMAN vs. NOT

  • From: Bernard Polarski <bpolarsk@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 01:43:56 -0700 (PDT)

I Agree with you as long as it is  Rman towards tape not toward disk. I  love 
Rman direct to tape as I hate Rman  to disk. There is a world between Rman to 
disk and Rman to tape.
 
 So let's consider what happen in the case where the catalog is not connect to 
a media tape layers and what is handy feature is left of  Rman :
 
 
 rman << EOF
    connect target / ;
    connect catalog  mycat/*****@cat.db  -- Determining the  right credentials 
was the *hardest* part!
    restore database ;
    recover  database ;
    open database ;
 EOF
 
 
 a) connect target /    :  This assume that you have retrieved a good 
controlfile for this backup. Since it is backup on disk, you somehow provided 
it yourself.
 
 b) connect catalog : no special comment
 
 c) restore database :  You had to provide the set of correct dataset files. 
You got the list from catalog. Problem is that you needed to dump from tape 
this dataset into a staging area,  and after that Rman will read them and 
recreated the datafiles ===> twice the disk space and twice the IO, and all 
that providing you retrieve the correct set of datasets file whose name is a 
pure garbage.
 
 d) recover database : again you dumped from tape the correct dataset of files 
containing all requested archive logs. good news is that this time you won't 
need twice the disk space. bads news is you need to check manually with the 
command 'list achive all'  which dataset contains which archives and bring them 
all from tape.
 
 e) open database ; just a shorter way to type 'alter database open [resetlogs]'
 
 
 So what did you gain in fact.? Rman, when not to tape leaves you with all the 
fuss to providd the files yourselves and requires twice the space to restore a 
datafile.
 
 B. Polarski
 http://www.smenu.org

Other related posts: