RE: Ontape
Thanks for that, however we have a problem. We cannot use dbexport as we
are taking the data from a live production system that is 24x7. As I
understand it dbexport places locks on tables and is therefore
unacceptable. We have decided to set isolation level to dirty read (we
don't need the data to be totally accurate) and do unload.
Thanks to everybody for the answers
} ----------
} From: Cosmo Lee[SMTP:"*N O - S P A M*cosmo"@echonyc.com]
} Sent: Monday, September 08, 1997 7:39 PM
} To: Robertson Lee NTSE
} Subject: Re: Ontape
}
} You can't restore to different chunk sizes with `ontape` - you must
} restore to the same disk configuration as the archive came from.
}
} In order to restore to different chunk sizes, you can use `dbexport`
} and
} `dbimport`. Most of the other archive utilities dump data in binary
} format which is specific to the instance. dbexport/dbimport dump/load
} data in ASCII format which is portable.
}
} HTH,
} Cosmo
}
} Robertson Lee NTSE wrote:
}
} > Is it possible to squeeze the data from the ontape -s (using ontape
} > -r)
} > into a 10Gb area (say of 2x5Gb chunks) using offsets etc.
} > Documentation
} > seems to suggest that if we archived it from a chunk of 2Gb, even if
} > only 2Mb was used within it, to restore it on another machine would
} > need
} > a chunk of 2Gb to restore it into. Therefore the machine on which it
} > is
} > to be restored needs in excess of 30Gb in free space. Am I way out
} > here
} > or is this the way Informix works.
} >
} > This is a particularly urgent problem so immediate replies would be
} > greatly appreciated.
} >
} > Regards
} >
} > Lee
}
}
}
} --
} * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
} ADDRESS ALTERED TO FOIL SPAMMERS: Remove "*NO-SPAM*" to reply.
}
} Cosmo Lee Multi-User Computer Systems Brooklyn, NY
}
} "JUST SAY 'NO' TO SPAM"
} * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
}
}