DATABASE CONSISTENCY

  • I 'm going to create a new database for

    the checkes application of the bank I work for. It's going to be a large enough database (about 500 G per year).For our

    disaster plan we will use SRDF technology.

    In order to save some money, we think to use this technology only for the live part of the database (one or two months). If the live part of the database is stored in a different datafile from the other data and the SRDF technology is used only for this datafile, if we restore only this datafile in the disaster site will the database be consistent ?

    Thanks

    Petros

  • I've never tried this, but BOL says you can do a partial backup and restore of specified filegroups, always including the PRIMARY filegroup.  When you do a partial restore however, all objects in the unrestored filegroups are marked OFFLINE and are unusable.

    It sounds like you could create a secondary filegroup for the tables holding the older data, leaving the live data in PRIMARY.  You would need a full backup whenever the older data has been changed (monthly?), and a partial backup of the PRIMARY filegroup daily (or whatever frequency you think appropriate).  Then you could do a partial restore of the primary filegroup to a scratch database and copy the data back to the main database.  Sounds ugly, but that's the way I read it.  I would LOVE to hear someone tell me a better way.

    The documentation for SQL 2005 says you can mark individual filegroups as readonly, then you can do a partial backup/restore of PRIMARY and any other read/write filegroups directly to the original database without losing the other filegroups.  Sounds like just what you're looking for.

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 1 (of 1 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply