Subject | Re: Corruption in Firebird Classic 1.5.3.4870 |
---|---|
Author | Adam |
Post date | 2006-12-03T01:09:24Z |
--- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, jason palmer
<jasonthepolymath@...> wrote:
everyone works as normal while the backup runs. It can happen without
user interaction during non peak times.
Expecting end users to backup is a poor design if your data is
important and not easily regenerated.
a lot of people who would be interested in the specifics, in
particular what you consider 'large', and what instabilities one
should expect.
From what I can gather, this thread is about an issue that is not yet
identified, the only thing these two databases have in common is that
they are large. That does not imply that all large databases are at risk.
Adam
<jasonthepolymath@...> wrote:
>Your kidding right? Firebird supports a hot backup, meaning that
> If it takes a long time to backup, then users will never backup :)
>
everyone works as normal while the backup runs. It can happen without
user interaction during non peak times.
Expecting end users to backup is a poor design if your data is
important and not easily regenerated.
> jason palmer wrote:your using a very
> > no, trust me on this one, large databases are not stable, unless
> > expensive database systemAre you referring to Firebird databases specifically? If so there are
a lot of people who would be interested in the specifics, in
particular what you consider 'large', and what instabilities one
should expect.
From what I can gather, this thread is about an issue that is not yet
identified, the only thing these two databases have in common is that
they are large. That does not imply that all large databases are at risk.
Adam