Re: Difference between ONARCHIVE and ONTAPE?

"Art S. Kagel" <kagel@bloomberg.net> offerred: +Chuanlarp Satchavarodom wrote: +> +> Dear All, +> +> I started my Informix backup experience using onarchive. And I found +> out that ontape is much more simpler and can achieve the same result +> including continuous log backup. What is the difference, and in which +> circumstatance should I use onarchive instead of ontape. Thank you. + +Onarchive was an early attempt by Informix to create a more powerful +archive utility for larger more complex databases that needed partial +archives and restores. Ontape is sufficient for most needs. <rest snipped> I would only modify Art's excellent summation on one minor point: Informix bought/licensed the code for onarchive (I can't remember now from who), and did the minimum needed mods to get it to work with OnLine. I think anyone who has used it found it pretty obvious that the UI was nothing like any other Informix tool (it reminds me of a cross between JCL and VMS). If ontape is insufficient for your needs, onbar is definitely the way to go. Combined with ISM shipping with 7.3, you get a really nice backup tool. I wonder how much further down the road Informix will be shipping/supporting onarchive? Dave ** Dave Kosenko <davek@summitdata.com> ** Director of Training Services (732) 469-4070 ** Summit Data Group (an Informix Authorized Education Center) ** Find my advice useful? Let me teach you everything I know about ** Informix. Sign up for OFFICIAL Informix training at SDG. ** For details, see http://www.summitdata.com/training