Subject | Re: [firebird-support] Re: Ghost image backups |
---|---|
Author | Woody |
Post date | 2008-06-06T14:05:06Z |
From: "Adam" <s3057043@...>
to ensure compatibility with 2.1. The program itself shouldn't have to be
changed, to my knowledge. Of course, along with upgrading fields, etc. comes
additional time for testing to make sure nothing was broken along the way.
It's something I'm going to take a quick look at this weekend to see if it's
feasible within a couple days work. If so, I might give it a shot to see
what happens.
Thanks,
Woody (TMW)
> I could recommend that they exclude theI'm fairly sure that most of the changes would be database structure changes
>> database directory and only backup the backup. Not sure how well it
> would go
>> over though since they are relying on 15 minutes intervals for
> backups. Even
>> if I set my own backups at every hour, that's a big load on the
> system with
>> multiple users.
>
> How far away is your product from being able to support Firebird 2.1?
> If it was possible to get it to work, you could use NBackup. NBackup
> could do a full backup (level 0) daily, a level 1 every hour and then
> a level 2 every 15 minutes.
>
> That approach should get a pretty good compromise between performance
> and closeness.
to ensure compatibility with 2.1. The program itself shouldn't have to be
changed, to my knowledge. Of course, along with upgrading fields, etc. comes
additional time for testing to make sure nothing was broken along the way.
It's something I'm going to take a quick look at this weekend to see if it's
feasible within a couple days work. If so, I might give it a shot to see
what happens.
Thanks,
Woody (TMW)