--- Begin Message ---

Subject:	Re: SQL-BackTrack and ADSM
From:	David Hendrix <dmhendri AT mema.mail.fedex DOT com>
To:	"Keenan AT Webname DOT com" <Keenan%Webname.com AT internet.fedex DOT com>
Date:	Wed, 25 Feb 1998 15:52:07 -0700

Restore performance is relative to the RDBMS being used.  Sybase is
notoriously slow during a recovery.  This is not due to ADSM nor
Backtrack, but to the reallocation of extents during a loaddb
operation.  If you've got fast disk arrays and big CPUs you'll do
better.

We have seen good performance on Informix and Oracle.  We use ON-Bar for
informix and still use Backtrack for many Oracle instances.

Backtrack gives you a single focus for operational procedures related to
RDBMS backup and recovery.  That can be a plus, but don't count on
backtrack being a top performer.

Until ON-Bar changes it's philosophy and decides to control the backup
objects (objects sent on different days have the same name, hence you
must manage the RDBMS backup via ADSM Policy, which is not designed for
Full/Incr/Incr/Full) it's a toss up between backtrack and ON-Bar.  We
chose ON-Bar because of one simple factor: money - why pay $1,000s for
functionality already built into the RDBMS?

Finally, backtrack will have to distinguish itself in the future to
capture non-Sybase RDBMS customers, since it's value add is becoming
more questionable as techonology changes.

David Hendrix
dmhendri AT fedex DOT com

As a side note, if you talk to Veritas, they would have you host all of
the DB volumes in the newest Veritas filesystem, then run their backup
product to do block by block backups.  Hence, you would circumvent the
XBSA interfaces altogther.  I guess that's fine for Oracle and Sybase,
but makes no sense for Informix which does true incrementals anyway.
Plus the prereq's are pretty one-vendor sided.  Since Veritas AND Oracle
were both here recently patting each other on the back, I wonder what
Veritas thinks of the "no third-party hot-backups" Keenan was speaking
of.  Sounds like VFS+VeritasBackup is an alternative hot backup to
recovery manager.

Keenan D Stratton wrote:
>
> >From what I understand, Oracle has stated that they will no longer support
> 'third-party' hot backup products!  We were in the process of evaluating
> SQL-BackTrack when we were given this information.  We decided not to
> continue any further with evaluation.  We will rely on our own hot grown
> 'hot backup' scripts to backup dump Oracle files.  I believe Oracle has
> taken this stance due to the fact that Oracle 8 will provide a much more
> robust EBU module.
>
> On Wednesday, February 25, 1998 3:05 PM, Ben Kokenge [SMTP:ben AT EDMS DOT 
> NET]
> wrote:
> | Does anyone have any experience or advice for using
> | Datatools' SQL-BackTrack with ADSM?
> |
> | I have heard that the restore performance is bad.
> |
> | any comments would be appreciated
> |
> | -thanks Ben

--- End Message ---