Re: Why there is no controlfile in Informix like Oracle ?

Daniel Morgan said: > Madison Pruet wrote: > >> Daniel -- I'm afraid that you're showing circular logic. > > Not at all as I hope you will see. Madison, I must agree with Daniel here: pompous pretensiousness is not circular logic. >> If the backup is encapsulated (rule #1) then the control information is >> self >> contained in the database backup. > > Exactly. I can't think of any other way to do it. Can you? > > If control information is not able to be >> self contained within the backup, then we are not dealing with a >> sophisticated system, just an overly-complicated one. > > It is if you follow the instructions on how to perform the backup. I > don't think you can count as a backup something done that contravenes > the instructions on how to perform a backup. Can you? > >> The whole topic of this thread was why Informix doesn't need a control >> file. >> Well -- the reason is because the control information is embeded within >> the >> database. So it is backed up and restored as part of the database >> itself. > > What to you constitutes a database in Informix and what do you believe > is the equivalent physical object(s) in Oracle? > >> So while some systems may require careful backup of multiple things so >> that >> the backup is complete, that is not the case with IDS. > > Does the Informix database exist anywhere, larger than > Mom'sCookierecipeDB, that does not consist of multiple physical files? > If so exactly what do you think will be the result of backing up only > one of those physical files if another one is lost? Oh. Circular, maybe. Logic...? Probably not. -- Bye now, Obnoxio "C'est pas parce qu'on n'a rien ' dire qu'il faut fermer sa gueule" - Coluche "I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't get my head up my ass" - JCH "Ogni uomo mi guarda come se fossi una testa di cazzo" - Marco http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html sending to informix-list

"Obnoxio The Clown" <obnoxio@serendipita.com> wrote in message news:cgre5t$fjd$1@news.xmission.com... > > > Daniel Morgan said: > > Madison Pruet wrote: > > > >> Daniel -- I'm afraid that you're showing circular logic. > > > > Not at all as I hope you will see. > > Madison, I must agree with Daniel here: pompous pretensiousness is not > circular logic. > I was trying to be nice. ;-)