Re: Opinions Wanted: ON-ARCHIVE vs old-fashioned ontape

> jvemo@cyberspace.com (Jon C. Vemo) writes: > Bill - > > On-Archive is going to be replaced in an upcoming release (I think either > 7.2 or 8.0). On-Archive is a bit cumbersome to setup and use, so if you > really do not need the features it provides, I would strongly recommend > holding off. Strange as it may seem Informix people told me at the user conference that the new backup system would only be available with version 8 and above. I also agree with you, but we plan to test On-Archive because it can check the tape after archiving and can restore more selectively than the whole database instance (all databases in it). By chunck if I don't remember wrongly. I haven't done my full homework on this yet, but I hope also On-Archive can be made to run from cron. To Informix: Will the new backup functions be able to do full backup (by db-instance) and still recover only a single table? > > Jon > > At 01:52 PM 8/14/95 -0400, Bill Kules wrote: > > > >Is anyone aware of compelling reasons to use ON-ARCHIVE > >instead of ontape? > > > >It's got lots of nice features, but we don't need them, > >so I'm inclined to stick with ontape, since I can wrap > >it in a shell script and hide it from the operator. > > Nils.Myklebust@ccmail.telemax.no NM-data, Dalsbergstien 7, N-0170 Oslo, Norway My opinions are those of my company