> No, I think you don't understand the point of volume shadow copies.
> Volume shadow copies (from a semantic point of view) clone all files
> atmoically. The database server can continue working on its version, the
> shadow copy has it's own. For the very short period of time, the
> os requires
> for instantiating the volume shadow, all accesses are stalled.
>
> > Again - they may be like db transactions semantically but they
> are not the
> same. The OS and NTBACKUP do not know about the way FB structures
> it's paged
> data.
>
> It simply does not need to. As power failures don't need to.
>
> Regards,
> Steffen

Please also bear in mind that with the use of database shadows, if that's
what you are really referring to, you should not rely on the shadow copy as
a database backup. Under this scheme, corruptions in the master are
instantaneously included in the shadow version. They are good for protection
against hardware failure and for that reason you need the shadow created on
another physical disk (not the same disk). But there is no substitute for a
good regular gbak/test restore regime as far as secure backups are
concerned.
Alan