HP3000-L Archives

August 2000, Week 2

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Doug Werth <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Doug Werth <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 9 Aug 2000 11:36:54 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (25 lines)
Rich Trapp writes:
>
>    We're working on some recovery plans and we're wondering if restoring
the
> latest partial over the latest full will cause the database to be
> inconsistent.  Doesn't seem likely even if only rootfile and datasets that
> have changed are stored...everything should be consistent (right?).
>

As others have mentioned the (current) default is to store the entire
database unless the ;PARTDB option is used.

From a recovery standpoint, if you restore your most recent partial backup
first, and then restore from your full backup USING THE ;KEEP option it
won't really matter whether the entire database was on the partial or not.

While your method of restoring the partial over top of the full will work,
restoring the partial first followed by the full using ";keep" is more
efficient.

Doug.

Doug Werth                             Beechglen Development Inc.
[log in to unmask]                               Cincinnati, Ohio

ATOM RSS1 RSS2