Veritas-bu

[Veritas-bu] Incremental RMAN backups on split BCV's

2003-01-21 13:01:55
Subject: [Veritas-bu] Incremental RMAN backups on split BCV's
From: Mark.Donaldson AT experianems DOT com (Donaldson, Mark)
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 11:01:55 -0700
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C2C177.2EFDF720
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"

So we're looking at changing our backup methods using EMC BCV's.  Today we
do full filesystem backups of our Oracle database; we set the DB into hot
backup mode, split the data BCV's, roll the logs, then split the archived
redo BCV's.  These BCV's are then imported & mounted to our media server &
we do simple filesystem full backups to tape.

The problem is that anticipated growth will make this difficult in the
future - we won't be able to move enough data in the necessary timespan.
Therefore, we're looking at using Oracle RMAN to perform database
incrementals.  However, I'm still wanting to perform the backup off-host so
the idea is to use RMAN to backup BCV's mounted on my media server.

The idea is this, and I'm looking for proponents or detractors to this idea:

1. split & import as above to our media server
2. Open the database on the media server
3. perform the RMAN full and/or incremental as necessary
4. shutdown the Oracle instance
5. incrementally re-establish.
6. rinse & repeat the next night

The thought is that since the instance on the media server is opened &
closed normally and since the BCV should be a blockwise identical copy of
the original database, then RMAN doesn't know from run-to-run that this is a
"new" copy of the DB.  As far as RMAN is concerned, the only DB involved
lives exclusively on the media server - it doesn't have to know about the
original mounted on the main server.

Anybody doing this?  Any "gotchas"?

-M

------_=_NextPart_001_01C2C177.2EFDF720
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
5.5.2653.12">
<TITLE>Incremental RMAN backups on split BCV's</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>So we're looking at changing our backup methods using =
EMC BCV's.&nbsp; Today we do full filesystem backups of our Oracle =
database; we set the DB into hot backup mode, split the data BCV's, =
roll the logs, then split the archived redo BCV's.&nbsp; These BCV's =
are then imported &amp; mounted to our media server &amp; we do simple =
filesystem full backups to tape.</FONT></P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>The problem is that anticipated growth will make this =
difficult in the future - we won't be able to move enough data in the =
necessary timespan.&nbsp; Therefore, we're looking at using Oracle RMAN =
to perform database incrementals.&nbsp; However, I'm still wanting to =
perform the backup off-host so the idea is to use RMAN to backup BCV's =
mounted on my media server.</FONT></P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>The idea is this, and I'm looking for proponents or =
detractors to this idea:</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>1. split &amp; import as above to our media =
server</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>2. Open the database on the media server</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>3. perform the RMAN full and/or incremental as =
necessary</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>4. shutdown the Oracle instance</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>5. incrementally re-establish.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>6. rinse &amp; repeat the next night</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>The thought is that since the instance on the media =
server is opened &amp; closed normally and since the BCV should be a =
blockwise identical copy of the original database, then RMAN doesn't =
know from run-to-run that this is a &quot;new&quot; copy of the =
DB.&nbsp; As far as RMAN is concerned, the only DB involved lives =
exclusively on the media server - it doesn't have to know about the =
original mounted on the main server.</FONT></P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Anybody doing this?&nbsp; Any =
&quot;gotchas&quot;?</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>-M</FONT>
</P>

</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C2C177.2EFDF720--

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>