Hello there
To the server with sql server there is also backup tape.
is there a way to backup the database directly to dape?
use
BACKUP DATABASE TO TAPE
read BACKUP DATABASE from BOL for more info
vt
"Roy Goldhammer" <roy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OvVVz%23EGHHA.4580@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Hello there
> To the server with sql server there is also backup tape.
> is there a way to backup the database directly to dape?
>
|||Roy
While tape backups are a good thing. You can store them off site for
disaster recovery purposes. It takes longer to both backup and restore from
tape.
Unless disk space is really an issue, it's best to do both.
Backup to disk first, it's quicker so less impact on your application. Then
copy the disk backup to tape and store off site. Very often if you do need to
restore a database, it will be the last backup, so you can restore quicker
from disk.
We usually keep the last two full backups on disk, and two days worth of
transaction logs. This gives us good flexibility and although we have a lot
of SQL Server based systems, we virtually never need the tape based backups.
Our backup strategy was designed to make that the case.
If required, restores from disk are much quicker and quite often time is an
issue if you need to perform a restore.
Hope this helps
John
"vt" wrote:
> use
> BACKUP DATABASE TO TAPE
> read BACKUP DATABASE from BOL for more info
> vt
>
> "Roy Goldhammer" <roy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:OvVVz%23EGHHA.4580@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>
>
|||Whell John:
my question came from argue with the system administrators that said: we
need sql agent third party program to backup to tape. and it cost at least
750$
as you explain, it is not true and that is what i need to know.
About backup, there is a problem of storage: my HD size is 130GB, and it
holds all sql and backups.
I need to backup 5 databases every day which their size approx 3.5 gb of
data and log. so after two weeks of backuping there is no more free space to
use.
thanks
"John Bandettini" <JohnBandettini@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:5F9AC2AA-4049-48F4-848B-C526F4FF5B38@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Roy
> While tape backups are a good thing. You can store them off site for
> disaster recovery purposes. It takes longer to both backup and restore
> from
> tape.
> Unless disk space is really an issue, it's best to do both.
> Backup to disk first, it's quicker so less impact on your application.
> Then
> copy the disk backup to tape and store off site. Very often if you do need
> to
> restore a database, it will be the last backup, so you can restore quicker
> from disk.
> We usually keep the last two full backups on disk, and two days worth of
> transaction logs. This gives us good flexibility and although we have a
> lot
> of SQL Server based systems, we virtually never need the tape based
> backups.
> Our backup strategy was designed to make that the case.
> If required, restores from disk are much quicker and quite often time is
> an
> issue if you need to perform a restore.
> Hope this helps
> John
> "vt" wrote:
|||I suggest you keep only the most recent SQL Server backups on disk,
depending on your disk space constraints. You can archive those backup
files to tape for offsite and long term storage.
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Roy Goldhammer" <roy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OSYRMQGGHHA.1248@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Whell John:
> my question came from argue with the system administrators that said: we
> need sql agent third party program to backup to tape. and it cost at least
> 750$
> as you explain, it is not true and that is what i need to know.
> About backup, there is a problem of storage: my HD size is 130GB, and it
> holds all sql and backups.
> I need to backup 5 databases every day which their size approx 3.5 gb of
> data and log. so after two weeks of backuping there is no more free space
> to use.
> thanks
> "John Bandettini" <JohnBandettini@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message news:5F9AC2AA-4049-48F4-848B-C526F4FF5B38@.microsoft.com...
>
Showing posts with label directly. Show all posts
Showing posts with label directly. Show all posts
Friday, February 24, 2012
backuping to tape
Hello there
To the server with sql server there is also backup tape.
is there a way to backup the database directly to dape?use
BACKUP DATABASE TO TAPE
read BACKUP DATABASE from BOL for more info
vt
"Roy Goldhammer" <roy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OvVVz%23EGHHA.4580@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Hello there
> To the server with sql server there is also backup tape.
> is there a way to backup the database directly to dape?
>|||Roy
While tape backups are a good thing. You can store them off site for
disaster recovery purposes. It takes longer to both backup and restore from
tape.
Unless disk space is really an issue, it's best to do both.
Backup to disk first, it's quicker so less impact on your application. Then
copy the disk backup to tape and store off site. Very often if you do need t
o
restore a database, it will be the last backup, so you can restore quicker
from disk.
We usually keep the last two full backups on disk, and two days worth of
transaction logs. This gives us good flexibility and although we have a lot
of SQL Server based systems, we virtually never need the tape based backups.
Our backup strategy was designed to make that the case.
If required, restores from disk are much quicker and quite often time is an
issue if you need to perform a restore.
Hope this helps
John
"vt" wrote:
> use
> BACKUP DATABASE TO TAPE
> read BACKUP DATABASE from BOL for more info
> vt
>
> "Roy Goldhammer" <roy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:OvVVz%23EGHHA.4580@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>
>|||Whell John:
my question came from argue with the system administrators that said: we
need sql agent third party program to backup to tape. and it cost at least
750$
as you explain, it is not true and that is what i need to know.
About backup, there is a problem of storage: my HD size is 130GB, and it
holds all sql and backups.
I need to backup 5 databases every day which their size approx 3.5 gb of
data and log. so after two weeks of backuping there is no more free space to
use.
thanks
"John Bandettini" <JohnBandettini@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:5F9AC2AA-4049-48F4-848B-C526F4FF5B38@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Roy
> While tape backups are a good thing. You can store them off site for
> disaster recovery purposes. It takes longer to both backup and restore
> from
> tape.
> Unless disk space is really an issue, it's best to do both.
> Backup to disk first, it's quicker so less impact on your application.
> Then
> copy the disk backup to tape and store off site. Very often if you do need
> to
> restore a database, it will be the last backup, so you can restore quicker
> from disk.
> We usually keep the last two full backups on disk, and two days worth of
> transaction logs. This gives us good flexibility and although we have a
> lot
> of SQL Server based systems, we virtually never need the tape based
> backups.
> Our backup strategy was designed to make that the case.
> If required, restores from disk are much quicker and quite often time is
> an
> issue if you need to perform a restore.
> Hope this helps
> John
> "vt" wrote:
>|||I suggest you keep only the most recent SQL Server backups on disk,
depending on your disk space constraints. You can archive those backup
files to tape for offsite and long term storage.
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Roy Goldhammer" <roy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OSYRMQGGHHA.1248@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Whell John:
> my question came from argue with the system administrators that said: we
> need sql agent third party program to backup to tape. and it cost at least
> 750$
> as you explain, it is not true and that is what i need to know.
> About backup, there is a problem of storage: my HD size is 130GB, and it
> holds all sql and backups.
> I need to backup 5 databases every day which their size approx 3.5 gb of
> data and log. so after two weeks of backuping there is no more free space
> to use.
> thanks
> "John Bandettini" <JohnBandettini@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message news:5F9AC2AA-4049-48F4-848B-C526F4FF5B38@.microsoft.com...
>
To the server with sql server there is also backup tape.
is there a way to backup the database directly to dape?use
BACKUP DATABASE TO TAPE
read BACKUP DATABASE from BOL for more info
vt
"Roy Goldhammer" <roy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OvVVz%23EGHHA.4580@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Hello there
> To the server with sql server there is also backup tape.
> is there a way to backup the database directly to dape?
>|||Roy
While tape backups are a good thing. You can store them off site for
disaster recovery purposes. It takes longer to both backup and restore from
tape.
Unless disk space is really an issue, it's best to do both.
Backup to disk first, it's quicker so less impact on your application. Then
copy the disk backup to tape and store off site. Very often if you do need t
o
restore a database, it will be the last backup, so you can restore quicker
from disk.
We usually keep the last two full backups on disk, and two days worth of
transaction logs. This gives us good flexibility and although we have a lot
of SQL Server based systems, we virtually never need the tape based backups.
Our backup strategy was designed to make that the case.
If required, restores from disk are much quicker and quite often time is an
issue if you need to perform a restore.
Hope this helps
John
"vt" wrote:
> use
> BACKUP DATABASE TO TAPE
> read BACKUP DATABASE from BOL for more info
> vt
>
> "Roy Goldhammer" <roy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:OvVVz%23EGHHA.4580@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>
>|||Whell John:
my question came from argue with the system administrators that said: we
need sql agent third party program to backup to tape. and it cost at least
750$
as you explain, it is not true and that is what i need to know.
About backup, there is a problem of storage: my HD size is 130GB, and it
holds all sql and backups.
I need to backup 5 databases every day which their size approx 3.5 gb of
data and log. so after two weeks of backuping there is no more free space to
use.
thanks
"John Bandettini" <JohnBandettini@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:5F9AC2AA-4049-48F4-848B-C526F4FF5B38@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Roy
> While tape backups are a good thing. You can store them off site for
> disaster recovery purposes. It takes longer to both backup and restore
> from
> tape.
> Unless disk space is really an issue, it's best to do both.
> Backup to disk first, it's quicker so less impact on your application.
> Then
> copy the disk backup to tape and store off site. Very often if you do need
> to
> restore a database, it will be the last backup, so you can restore quicker
> from disk.
> We usually keep the last two full backups on disk, and two days worth of
> transaction logs. This gives us good flexibility and although we have a
> lot
> of SQL Server based systems, we virtually never need the tape based
> backups.
> Our backup strategy was designed to make that the case.
> If required, restores from disk are much quicker and quite often time is
> an
> issue if you need to perform a restore.
> Hope this helps
> John
> "vt" wrote:
>|||I suggest you keep only the most recent SQL Server backups on disk,
depending on your disk space constraints. You can archive those backup
files to tape for offsite and long term storage.
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Roy Goldhammer" <roy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OSYRMQGGHHA.1248@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Whell John:
> my question came from argue with the system administrators that said: we
> need sql agent third party program to backup to tape. and it cost at least
> 750$
> as you explain, it is not true and that is what i need to know.
> About backup, there is a problem of storage: my HD size is 130GB, and it
> holds all sql and backups.
> I need to backup 5 databases every day which their size approx 3.5 gb of
> data and log. so after two weeks of backuping there is no more free space
> to use.
> thanks
> "John Bandettini" <JohnBandettini@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message news:5F9AC2AA-4049-48F4-848B-C526F4FF5B38@.microsoft.com...
>
backuping to tape
Hello there
To the server with sql server there is also backup tape.
is there a way to backup the database directly to dape?use
BACKUP DATABASE TO TAPE
read BACKUP DATABASE from BOL for more info
vt
"Roy Goldhammer" <roy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OvVVz%23EGHHA.4580@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Hello there
> To the server with sql server there is also backup tape.
> is there a way to backup the database directly to dape?
>|||Roy
While tape backups are a good thing. You can store them off site for
disaster recovery purposes. It takes longer to both backup and restore from
tape.
Unless disk space is really an issue, it's best to do both.
Backup to disk first, it's quicker so less impact on your application. Then
copy the disk backup to tape and store off site. Very often if you do need to
restore a database, it will be the last backup, so you can restore quicker
from disk.
We usually keep the last two full backups on disk, and two days worth of
transaction logs. This gives us good flexibility and although we have a lot
of SQL Server based systems, we virtually never need the tape based backups.
Our backup strategy was designed to make that the case.
If required, restores from disk are much quicker and quite often time is an
issue if you need to perform a restore.
Hope this helps
John
"vt" wrote:
> use
> BACKUP DATABASE TO TAPE
> read BACKUP DATABASE from BOL for more info
> vt
>
> "Roy Goldhammer" <roy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:OvVVz%23EGHHA.4580@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> > Hello there
> >
> > To the server with sql server there is also backup tape.
> >
> > is there a way to backup the database directly to dape?
> >
>
>|||Whell John:
my question came from argue with the system administrators that said: we
need sql agent third party program to backup to tape. and it cost at least
750$
as you explain, it is not true and that is what i need to know.
About backup, there is a problem of storage: my HD size is 130GB, and it
holds all sql and backups.
I need to backup 5 databases every day which their size approx 3.5 gb of
data and log. so after two weeks of backuping there is no more free space to
use.
thanks
"John Bandettini" <JohnBandettini@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:5F9AC2AA-4049-48F4-848B-C526F4FF5B38@.microsoft.com...
> Roy
> While tape backups are a good thing. You can store them off site for
> disaster recovery purposes. It takes longer to both backup and restore
> from
> tape.
> Unless disk space is really an issue, it's best to do both.
> Backup to disk first, it's quicker so less impact on your application.
> Then
> copy the disk backup to tape and store off site. Very often if you do need
> to
> restore a database, it will be the last backup, so you can restore quicker
> from disk.
> We usually keep the last two full backups on disk, and two days worth of
> transaction logs. This gives us good flexibility and although we have a
> lot
> of SQL Server based systems, we virtually never need the tape based
> backups.
> Our backup strategy was designed to make that the case.
> If required, restores from disk are much quicker and quite often time is
> an
> issue if you need to perform a restore.
> Hope this helps
> John
> "vt" wrote:
>> use
>> BACKUP DATABASE TO TAPE
>> read BACKUP DATABASE from BOL for more info
>> vt
>>
>> "Roy Goldhammer" <roy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:OvVVz%23EGHHA.4580@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> > Hello there
>> >
>> > To the server with sql server there is also backup tape.
>> >
>> > is there a way to backup the database directly to dape?
>> >
>>|||I suggest you keep only the most recent SQL Server backups on disk,
depending on your disk space constraints. You can archive those backup
files to tape for offsite and long term storage.
--
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Roy Goldhammer" <roy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OSYRMQGGHHA.1248@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Whell John:
> my question came from argue with the system administrators that said: we
> need sql agent third party program to backup to tape. and it cost at least
> 750$
> as you explain, it is not true and that is what i need to know.
> About backup, there is a problem of storage: my HD size is 130GB, and it
> holds all sql and backups.
> I need to backup 5 databases every day which their size approx 3.5 gb of
> data and log. so after two weeks of backuping there is no more free space
> to use.
> thanks
> "John Bandettini" <JohnBandettini@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message news:5F9AC2AA-4049-48F4-848B-C526F4FF5B38@.microsoft.com...
>> Roy
>> While tape backups are a good thing. You can store them off site for
>> disaster recovery purposes. It takes longer to both backup and restore
>> from
>> tape.
>> Unless disk space is really an issue, it's best to do both.
>> Backup to disk first, it's quicker so less impact on your application.
>> Then
>> copy the disk backup to tape and store off site. Very often if you do
>> need to
>> restore a database, it will be the last backup, so you can restore
>> quicker
>> from disk.
>> We usually keep the last two full backups on disk, and two days worth of
>> transaction logs. This gives us good flexibility and although we have a
>> lot
>> of SQL Server based systems, we virtually never need the tape based
>> backups.
>> Our backup strategy was designed to make that the case.
>> If required, restores from disk are much quicker and quite often time is
>> an
>> issue if you need to perform a restore.
>> Hope this helps
>> John
>> "vt" wrote:
>> use
>> BACKUP DATABASE TO TAPE
>> read BACKUP DATABASE from BOL for more info
>> vt
>>
>> "Roy Goldhammer" <roy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:OvVVz%23EGHHA.4580@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> > Hello there
>> >
>> > To the server with sql server there is also backup tape.
>> >
>> > is there a way to backup the database directly to dape?
>> >
>>
>
To the server with sql server there is also backup tape.
is there a way to backup the database directly to dape?use
BACKUP DATABASE TO TAPE
read BACKUP DATABASE from BOL for more info
vt
"Roy Goldhammer" <roy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OvVVz%23EGHHA.4580@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Hello there
> To the server with sql server there is also backup tape.
> is there a way to backup the database directly to dape?
>|||Roy
While tape backups are a good thing. You can store them off site for
disaster recovery purposes. It takes longer to both backup and restore from
tape.
Unless disk space is really an issue, it's best to do both.
Backup to disk first, it's quicker so less impact on your application. Then
copy the disk backup to tape and store off site. Very often if you do need to
restore a database, it will be the last backup, so you can restore quicker
from disk.
We usually keep the last two full backups on disk, and two days worth of
transaction logs. This gives us good flexibility and although we have a lot
of SQL Server based systems, we virtually never need the tape based backups.
Our backup strategy was designed to make that the case.
If required, restores from disk are much quicker and quite often time is an
issue if you need to perform a restore.
Hope this helps
John
"vt" wrote:
> use
> BACKUP DATABASE TO TAPE
> read BACKUP DATABASE from BOL for more info
> vt
>
> "Roy Goldhammer" <roy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:OvVVz%23EGHHA.4580@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> > Hello there
> >
> > To the server with sql server there is also backup tape.
> >
> > is there a way to backup the database directly to dape?
> >
>
>|||Whell John:
my question came from argue with the system administrators that said: we
need sql agent third party program to backup to tape. and it cost at least
750$
as you explain, it is not true and that is what i need to know.
About backup, there is a problem of storage: my HD size is 130GB, and it
holds all sql and backups.
I need to backup 5 databases every day which their size approx 3.5 gb of
data and log. so after two weeks of backuping there is no more free space to
use.
thanks
"John Bandettini" <JohnBandettini@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:5F9AC2AA-4049-48F4-848B-C526F4FF5B38@.microsoft.com...
> Roy
> While tape backups are a good thing. You can store them off site for
> disaster recovery purposes. It takes longer to both backup and restore
> from
> tape.
> Unless disk space is really an issue, it's best to do both.
> Backup to disk first, it's quicker so less impact on your application.
> Then
> copy the disk backup to tape and store off site. Very often if you do need
> to
> restore a database, it will be the last backup, so you can restore quicker
> from disk.
> We usually keep the last two full backups on disk, and two days worth of
> transaction logs. This gives us good flexibility and although we have a
> lot
> of SQL Server based systems, we virtually never need the tape based
> backups.
> Our backup strategy was designed to make that the case.
> If required, restores from disk are much quicker and quite often time is
> an
> issue if you need to perform a restore.
> Hope this helps
> John
> "vt" wrote:
>> use
>> BACKUP DATABASE TO TAPE
>> read BACKUP DATABASE from BOL for more info
>> vt
>>
>> "Roy Goldhammer" <roy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:OvVVz%23EGHHA.4580@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> > Hello there
>> >
>> > To the server with sql server there is also backup tape.
>> >
>> > is there a way to backup the database directly to dape?
>> >
>>|||I suggest you keep only the most recent SQL Server backups on disk,
depending on your disk space constraints. You can archive those backup
files to tape for offsite and long term storage.
--
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Roy Goldhammer" <roy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OSYRMQGGHHA.1248@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Whell John:
> my question came from argue with the system administrators that said: we
> need sql agent third party program to backup to tape. and it cost at least
> 750$
> as you explain, it is not true and that is what i need to know.
> About backup, there is a problem of storage: my HD size is 130GB, and it
> holds all sql and backups.
> I need to backup 5 databases every day which their size approx 3.5 gb of
> data and log. so after two weeks of backuping there is no more free space
> to use.
> thanks
> "John Bandettini" <JohnBandettini@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message news:5F9AC2AA-4049-48F4-848B-C526F4FF5B38@.microsoft.com...
>> Roy
>> While tape backups are a good thing. You can store them off site for
>> disaster recovery purposes. It takes longer to both backup and restore
>> from
>> tape.
>> Unless disk space is really an issue, it's best to do both.
>> Backup to disk first, it's quicker so less impact on your application.
>> Then
>> copy the disk backup to tape and store off site. Very often if you do
>> need to
>> restore a database, it will be the last backup, so you can restore
>> quicker
>> from disk.
>> We usually keep the last two full backups on disk, and two days worth of
>> transaction logs. This gives us good flexibility and although we have a
>> lot
>> of SQL Server based systems, we virtually never need the tape based
>> backups.
>> Our backup strategy was designed to make that the case.
>> If required, restores from disk are much quicker and quite often time is
>> an
>> issue if you need to perform a restore.
>> Hope this helps
>> John
>> "vt" wrote:
>> use
>> BACKUP DATABASE TO TAPE
>> read BACKUP DATABASE from BOL for more info
>> vt
>>
>> "Roy Goldhammer" <roy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:OvVVz%23EGHHA.4580@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> > Hello there
>> >
>> > To the server with sql server there is also backup tape.
>> >
>> > is there a way to backup the database directly to dape?
>> >
>>
>
Sunday, February 12, 2012
Backup to tape with SQL and NTbackup
We want to use the SQL 2000 backup to tape capability to
backup databases directly to tape, but also allow
NTBackup (from Windows 2000 or Server 2003) to write to
the tape without over-writing the SQL data.
I know that I can use SQL backup to write the backups to
disk, but I cannot afford the disk space, as tapes are
far cheaper than disks...
Does SQL backup recognise that NTBackup data is written
to the tape? Or does NTBackup recognise a previous
session from SQL and then append?
If one recognises the other, then I can simply set the
timing to ensure that the more "stupid" of the backup
routines runs first...
Any help appreciated.Beginning with SQL 7 ( I beleive it was), the SQL group changed the SQL tape
backup format to match that of the OS backups, so they are now compatible,
you may put both on the same tape... (Just be sure to append, not
overwrite.)
--
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Computer Education Services Corporation (CESC), Charlotte, NC
www.computeredservices.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
<myname@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:026801c3cdfb$aca4e940$a001280a@.phx.gbl...
> We want to use the SQL 2000 backup to tape capability to
> backup databases directly to tape, but also allow
> NTBackup (from Windows 2000 or Server 2003) to write to
> the tape without over-writing the SQL data.
> I know that I can use SQL backup to write the backups to
> disk, but I cannot afford the disk space, as tapes are
> far cheaper than disks...
> Does SQL backup recognise that NTBackup data is written
> to the tape? Or does NTBackup recognise a previous
> session from SQL and then append?
> If one recognises the other, then I can simply set the
> timing to ensure that the more "stupid" of the backup
> routines runs first...
> Any help appreciated.
backup databases directly to tape, but also allow
NTBackup (from Windows 2000 or Server 2003) to write to
the tape without over-writing the SQL data.
I know that I can use SQL backup to write the backups to
disk, but I cannot afford the disk space, as tapes are
far cheaper than disks...
Does SQL backup recognise that NTBackup data is written
to the tape? Or does NTBackup recognise a previous
session from SQL and then append?
If one recognises the other, then I can simply set the
timing to ensure that the more "stupid" of the backup
routines runs first...
Any help appreciated.Beginning with SQL 7 ( I beleive it was), the SQL group changed the SQL tape
backup format to match that of the OS backups, so they are now compatible,
you may put both on the same tape... (Just be sure to append, not
overwrite.)
--
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Computer Education Services Corporation (CESC), Charlotte, NC
www.computeredservices.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
<myname@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:026801c3cdfb$aca4e940$a001280a@.phx.gbl...
> We want to use the SQL 2000 backup to tape capability to
> backup databases directly to tape, but also allow
> NTBackup (from Windows 2000 or Server 2003) to write to
> the tape without over-writing the SQL data.
> I know that I can use SQL backup to write the backups to
> disk, but I cannot afford the disk space, as tapes are
> far cheaper than disks...
> Does SQL backup recognise that NTBackup data is written
> to the tape? Or does NTBackup recognise a previous
> session from SQL and then append?
> If one recognises the other, then I can simply set the
> timing to ensure that the more "stupid" of the backup
> routines runs first...
> Any help appreciated.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)