Re: To log or not to log, that is the question.

The advantages of using logging for non-transaction oriented databases means that you can recover from archives to the point of the last committed operation very easily. And you only get fast recovery on logged databases. You would never find it necessary to repeat a lot of data entry when the system crashed. If however you don't have logging on your database then you might find it necessary to redo all data entry since the last archive. It all depends on how much you want to protect your data. If you don't use logging you don't feel the need to protect it very much. What sort of data is it? Is it vital to your organisation - or is it just money. And then ask yourself - do I want to use mirroring? Do I ever need to? And if I justify the cost of mirrored disks why do I need logging? IMHO no database system in a production environment with small, medium, or even large updates can survive without this feature. The only databases that can get away with it are "reference only" databases. I don't understand why INFORMIX even thought logging should be optional!!! > Suppose your applications don't necessarily lend themselves to using > transacions. > > For example, simple data entry single row inserts, updates, deletes. > > Is it worth using transaction logging in this context? > > Would the only benefit be that you could do backups of the logs and > thereforehave incremental backups since your last "big" backup? > > If you dont use logging how big should logical logs be? > > By the way, please feel free to beat me up and tell me I'm a fool for > notusing logging > (as if I need to ask :) ). > > Malcolm Weallans Online Database Consultancy Phone 01628-72154 Fax 01628-37463 CIX - onlinedbc