100% agrre with Stan.

"better safe than sorry" applies here.

Nick

[log in to unmask]
----------
> From: Stan Sieler <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: JUMBO a new thread?
> Date: Wednesday, October 08, 1997 3:09 PM
>
> Glenn writes:
> > to which Stan responds:
> > > Yes, I agree.  Before jumbo datasets were released, I suggested (to
> > > all backup product engineers) that if they ever see a root file in
> > > a backup list (no matter how the list was specified), that they
should
> > > default to thinking "oh, the user probably wants the entire database
> > > backed up" ... and that they should add a keyword like "NODB" (or
> > > something) to *defeat* that default.
> ...
> > What do you think of a "helping" keyword, instead of a "trust me"
keyword?
> > In this example, we could use something like "WholeDB" or "CompleteDB".
> > This would preserve the existing behaviour (if I ask for MYDB, then
that
> > single file is all I'll get) while "helping" the user get the whole
> > database when needed.
>
> Ah...that's nice until you remember the original problem:
>    files (jumbo chunk data files) not getting stored.
>
> When STORE is concerned, it's always better to go for "store more files"
> than "store fewer files", as that means less chance of losing user data.
>
> Hence, that's why I want the backup products to default to storing
> an entire database ... but be overridable easily if desired.
>
> --
> Stan Sieler                                          [log in to unmask]
>                                      http://www.allegro.com/sieler.html