Re: Un-attended Large Archives (fwd)

In <1993May10.171624.777@informix.com> davek@newjersey.informix.com (Dave Kosenko) writes: >The balance is throughput vs. recovery time. Every customer must choose the >point of balance appropriate for their application. Many customers will >choose to add a minute or two to the recovery period in order to see better >throughput during uptime. Others, like yourself, are more concerned with >a fast return to operability. Note that some 6.0 features will make >checkpoints a bit less of a drag on throughput. That is what the balance *SHOULD BE*. The problem is that the online archive problem is requiring us to upset that balance! >You have received the wrong impression. The 6.0 release will include an entire >tape management subsystem, which will give a great deal of flexibility in >dealing with archiving large systems (e.g. dbspace level archives, supporting >multiple devices for a single archive, etc.). It is very well understood that >backups are an essential part of any successful system, and we are working >on improving the tools and mechanisms available for achieving a successful >strategy. Are you saying that the tape management subsystem and/or other 6.0 features will remove the checkpoint/online-archiving/tape change lockup??? graeme -- Disclaimer: The author's opinions are his own, and not necessarily those of Pyramid Technology Ltd. or Pyramid Technology Inc. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- -m------- Graeme Sargent Voice: +44 (0)252 373035 ---mmm----- Senior Database Consultant Fax : +44 (0)252 373135 -----mmmmm--- Pyramid Technology Ltd. Telex: Tell who??? -------mmmmmmm- Farnborough, Hants GU14 7PL Email: graeme@pyra.co.uk --------------------------------------------------------------------------- We have the technology. The tricky bit is learning how to use it.