> Hi,
>
> >Can anyone confirm by belief that it is not possible (or tricky) to
> >maintain a shadow copy on a physically different server in a windows
> >2003 environment?
>
> Yep, that's true. The shadow, as it is for the original database, must
> be at
> the same machine the FB process is running.
>
>
> >(you can I am told on Linux)
>
> On Linux there's an option on Firebird.conf to alow hosting a db file
> on a
> "network disc". One must be very care with this (look for
> "RemoteFileOpenAbility" at the end of firebird.conf)
>
>
> Regards,
> Anderson Farias

raid is the best shaodw option these days but
replication is always safer than shadowing anyway IMO.
with shadowing, a corruption in the master is immediately repeated in the
shadow.
with replication, the duplication of corruption is more difficult. An
excpetion in the repl process will be raised, or more often, it (the
corruption) never gets replicated. You're putting your data down another
clietn server path which is a really good filter.
There's no way I would rely on just shadowing as a means of providing hot
swaps, it's too late when you fnd out the database is busted. In critical
environments my apps automatically hot swap to a replcation target.
Alan