Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
Database Servers
DB2InformixIngresMS SQLOraclePervasive.SQLPostgreSQLProgressSybase
Desktop Databases
FileMakerFoxProMS AccessParadox
General
General DB TopicsDatabase Theory
Related Topics
Java Development.NET DevelopmentVB DevelopmentMore Topics ...

Database Forum / Informix Topics / July 2008

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

External Backup without blocking the database

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Christian Schmidt - 02 Jul 2008 13:29 GMT
Hi,

I would like to design a backup and restore concept for Informix with
a storage cluster technology. For the backup we would use the disk
mirror option of the cluster software. The storage cluster can do an
atomar split on mirrored disks. So I would like to ask if I can do the
external backup without blocking the whole database (onmode -c block).
I think that maybe a checkpoint with (onmode -c) is ok. And after the
checkpoint I would like to split all mirrored disks.
The split is really atomar to all disks. So they they will be splitted
all in the same time. There is no IO while the split is in progress.
Is it under these circumstances possible to don't block the database?

Christian Schmidt.
Neil Truby - 02 Jul 2008 13:59 GMT
> Hi,
>
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>
> Christian Schmidt.

I'm a little confused here.  I'm not sure what "atomar" is, or means.  But
...

1. Yes, critical to external backups is that all the disks "will be [split]
at the same time".  "Consistency Group" is the word for this.
2. *Why* do you wish to avoid blocking the database?  It's easy to script
sync->block->split->unblock.  Even on a database of terabytes the time
between block and unblock can be a second or two at most ...
3. In your suggestion above how would you ensure that there is no i/o
between the end of your checkpoint and the end of the disk split process,
*except* with a blocking checkpoint??
Kevin Cherkauer - 02 Jul 2008 19:58 GMT
"Neil Truby" <neil.truby@ardenta.com> wrote in message

> I'm a little confused here.  I'm not sure what "atomar" is, or means.

I would guess from the context that he means "atomic" and this is just a
minor English-is-not-his-native-language mistake. I know a lot of modern
storage boxes support atomic mirror splitting.

Signature

Kevin Cherkauer
Software Engineer
IBM Informix Dynamic Server -- Database Kernel

 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.