Subject | Re: [firebird-support] Newbies queries on type of data files and recovery options |
---|---|
Author | Markus Ostenried |
Post date | 2011-09-28T16:07:17Z |
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 15:58, Rohit Coder
<passionate_programmer@...> wrote:
1) Full hard disk: IIRC in this case Firebird will overwrite the file
from the beginning. Not good, but checking for free space on every
write would slow down writes too much. Just make sure you have enough
space.
2) Sudden power loss: Normally Firebird will just throw away the last
unfinished transaction, sometimes a quick (seconds in my cases) repair
with gfix tool was needed.
3) Not really a corruption but it comes up here occasionally so I'll
mention it: You can add a NOT NULL column to an existing table that
already contains records. Then it's up to you to fill that column with
values, or else Firebird will complain when you next *restore* the
database from a backup. But there's a command line switch to ignore
that complaining, so it's not a big problem.
HTH,
Markus
<passionate_programmer@...> wrote:
> 2. What is the table and data file max-size for version 2.5?http://www.firebirdfaq.org/faq61/
> 3. What are the common scenarios of a Firebird data file getting corrupt? In case of a single-file structure, I guess no other files need to be backed up?In over ten years the only corruptions I've seen were due to
1) Full hard disk: IIRC in this case Firebird will overwrite the file
from the beginning. Not good, but checking for free space on every
write would slow down writes too much. Just make sure you have enough
space.
2) Sudden power loss: Normally Firebird will just throw away the last
unfinished transaction, sometimes a quick (seconds in my cases) repair
with gfix tool was needed.
3) Not really a corruption but it comes up here occasionally so I'll
mention it: You can add a NOT NULL column to an existing table that
already contains records. Then it's up to you to fill that column with
values, or else Firebird will complain when you next *restore* the
database from a backup. But there's a command line switch to ignore
that complaining, so it's not a big problem.
HTH,
Markus