From: "Jim Starkey" <jas@...>

| >| Gbak does not copy the indexes or any other dynamic data. Gbak
| >recreates the indexes upon restore.
| >
| >Yes, knew that. The proposed behaviour is closer to shadows than to gbak
as
| >you very correctly stated. Maybe, if indexes are always stored on
separate
| >pages from pages where data lives, my scheme could be slightly updated to
| >skip over index pages. But I have no idea of the real internals of ODS
for
| >now.
| >
|
| Saving the indexes has two major advantages:
|
| 1. It makes it much faster to bring a backup on line.
| 2. It's vastly easier.
|
| Skipping the indexes means that somebody is going to have to dummy
| up index root pages as well as cope with a large number of AWOL
| pages. If we get an incrementation backup out of this thread,
| the cost is minor.
|
| Jim Starkey

In the light of the evolving possible solution based on the shadowing code,
which brings the ability to simply replace the database with the detached
shadow to do the 'restore', getting the indexes along now makes perfect
sense.

I will definitely have to work-out a further proposal on such a
shadow-derived scheme. I'm very short of being convinced.

Olivier Mascia
om@...