March 23, 2010 at 12:13 pm
If anything, I would rather have the option to take a full, copy-only backup of the existing database as part of the restore (probably as part of the WITH clause).
March 24, 2010 at 4:24 am
Matt,
Now that is a great idea as well.
March 29, 2010 at 1:39 pm
Its Great Idea.
Nowadays space is not an issue. Production data more costlier than space.
March 29, 2010 at 2:12 pm
It wouldn’t do anything you can’t do already. You can restore a database with a new name, verify it is OK, drop the old database, and then rename the restored database.
There are so many possible scenarios for a restore that I don’t think it is really that useful. For example, a complete restore up to a point in time of a failure using the full backup and transaction log backups.
I rarely use the GUI for a restore; I find that it’s easier to use a script.
March 29, 2010 at 4:05 pm
If I have a concern, I detach the existing database and change the extension to .old (ie: mydbname.mdf.old and mydbname.ldf.old). Then I restore from the backup. If anything fails, all I have to do is remove the .old part of the extension and attach the files. Once I know everything is good-to-go, I delete the old files and that frees up the space.
-SQLBill
Viewing 5 posts - 16 through 19 (of 19 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply
This website stores cookies on your computer.
These cookies are used to improve your website experience and provide more personalized services to you, both on this website and through other media.
To find out more about the cookies we use, see our Privacy Policy