Simple or Full Recovery
I have numerous replication subscribers that have to have backups done to keep log files under control. They do get a LOT of inserts/deletes during the day. I have been using simple recovery because the data does not really need to be backed up.
I am switching to Ola’s very cool Maintenance Scripts because it is easier and faster to deploy and reindexing can be more selective.
With Ola’s Maintenance Scripts – Can anyone see a reason not to leave the recovery model simple? Or should I go with full and backup the logs to every hour to keep them small? This is just for replication subscribers.
sql-server backup
edited Oct 29 '15 at 17:50
Erik
4,02431954
asked Oct 29 '15 at 17:38
Mike MMike M
11
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 8 mins ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
add a comment |
I have numerous replication subscribers that have to have backups done to keep log files under control. They do get a LOT of inserts/deletes during the day. I have been using simple recovery because the data does not really need to be backed up.
I am switching to Ola’s very cool Maintenance Scripts because it is easier and faster to deploy and reindexing can be more selective.
With Ola’s Maintenance Scripts – Can anyone see a reason not to leave the recovery model simple? Or should I go with full and backup the logs to every hour to keep them small? This is just for replication subscribers.
sql-server backup
edited Oct 29 '15 at 17:50
Erik
4,02431954
asked Oct 29 '15 at 17:38
Mike MMike M
11
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 8 mins ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
Why doesn't your data need to be backed up? Also why would the use of a maintenance script affect your position on the importance of your data?
– Erik
Oct 29 '15 at 17:52
Agree with Erik. Short answer is No, but maybe you're trying to get at something else here? Are you doing hourly snapshots of subscribers or something?
– Dave
Oct 29 '15 at 18:53
The servers are replication subscribers. They have copies of the data that lives on the publisher. The data gets full backups there.
– Mike M
Oct 29 '15 at 19:02
@MikeM So you have replicated DBs that get updated and inserted into regularly at the replicated DB level, correct? Huge long-running transactions will still cause the log file to grow in any recovery mode. If backups aren't needed, just keep them set to SIMPLE and see how it goes, but I thought with replication the logs are truncated at replication regardless. What version of SQL Server you're running all this on and setup how? Generally, data redundancy isn't meant to be a replacement for data backups as far as I know--your case may be unique perhaps--I assume your prod DBs are backed up?
– Pimp Juice IT
Oct 30 '15 at 19:46
add a comment |
I have numerous replication subscribers that have to have backups done to keep log files under control. They do get a LOT of inserts/deletes during the day. I have been using simple recovery because the data does not really need to be backed up.
I am switching to Ola’s very cool Maintenance Scripts because it is easier and faster to deploy and reindexing can be more selective.
With Ola’s Maintenance Scripts – Can anyone see a reason not to leave the recovery model simple? Or should I go with full and backup the logs to every hour to keep them small? This is just for replication subscribers.
sql-server backup
edited Oct 29 '15 at 17:50
Erik
4,02431954
asked Oct 29 '15 at 17:38
Mike MMike M
11
I have numerous replication subscribers that have to have backups done to keep log files under control. They do get a LOT of inserts/deletes during the day. I have been using simple recovery because the data does not really need to be backed up.
I am switching to Ola’s very cool Maintenance Scripts because it is easier and faster to deploy and reindexing can be more selective.
With Ola’s Maintenance Scripts – Can anyone see a reason not to leave the recovery model simple? Or should I go with full and backup the logs to every hour to keep them small? This is just for replication subscribers.
sql-server backup
sql-server backup
edited Oct 29 '15 at 17:50
Erik
4,02431954
asked Oct 29 '15 at 17:38
Mike MMike M
11
edited Oct 29 '15 at 17:50
Erik
4,02431954
asked Oct 29 '15 at 17:38
Mike MMike M
11
edited Oct 29 '15 at 17:50
Erik
4,02431954
edited Oct 29 '15 at 17:50
Erik
4,02431954
edited Oct 29 '15 at 17:50
Erik
4,02431954
4,02431954
asked Oct 29 '15 at 17:38
Mike MMike M
11
asked Oct 29 '15 at 17:38
Mike MMike M
11
asked Oct 29 '15 at 17:38
Mike MMike M
11
11
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 8 mins ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 8 mins ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
Why doesn't your data need to be backed up? Also why would the use of a maintenance script affect your position on the importance of your data?
– Erik
Oct 29 '15 at 17:52
Agree with Erik. Short answer is No, but maybe you're trying to get at something else here? Are you doing hourly snapshots of subscribers or something?
– Dave
Oct 29 '15 at 18:53
The servers are replication subscribers. They have copies of the data that lives on the publisher. The data gets full backups there.
– Mike M
Oct 29 '15 at 19:02
@MikeM So you have replicated DBs that get updated and inserted into regularly at the replicated DB level, correct? Huge long-running transactions will still cause the log file to grow in any recovery mode. If backups aren't needed, just keep them set to SIMPLE and see how it goes, but I thought with replication the logs are truncated at replication regardless. What version of SQL Server you're running all this on and setup how? Generally, data redundancy isn't meant to be a replacement for data backups as far as I know--your case may be unique perhaps--I assume your prod DBs are backed up?
– Pimp Juice IT
Oct 30 '15 at 19:46
add a comment |
Why doesn't your data need to be backed up? Also why would the use of a maintenance script affect your position on the importance of your data?
– Erik
Oct 29 '15 at 17:52
Agree with Erik. Short answer is No, but maybe you're trying to get at something else here? Are you doing hourly snapshots of subscribers or something?
– Dave
Oct 29 '15 at 18:53
The servers are replication subscribers. They have copies of the data that lives on the publisher. The data gets full backups there.
– Mike M
Oct 29 '15 at 19:02
@MikeM So you have replicated DBs that get updated and inserted into regularly at the replicated DB level, correct? Huge long-running transactions will still cause the log file to grow in any recovery mode. If backups aren't needed, just keep them set to SIMPLE and see how it goes, but I thought with replication the logs are truncated at replication regardless. What version of SQL Server you're running all this on and setup how? Generally, data redundancy isn't meant to be a replacement for data backups as far as I know--your case may be unique perhaps--I assume your prod DBs are backed up?
– Pimp Juice IT
Oct 30 '15 at 19:46
Why doesn't your data need to be backed up? Also why would the use of a maintenance script affect your position on the importance of your data?
– Erik
Oct 29 '15 at 17:52
Why doesn't your data need to be backed up? Also why would the use of a maintenance script affect your position on the importance of your data?
– Erik
Oct 29 '15 at 17:52
Agree with Erik. Short answer is No, but maybe you're trying to get at something else here? Are you doing hourly snapshots of subscribers or something?
– Dave
Oct 29 '15 at 18:53
Agree with Erik. Short answer is No, but maybe you're trying to get at something else here? Are you doing hourly snapshots of subscribers or something?
– Dave
Oct 29 '15 at 18:53
The servers are replication subscribers. They have copies of the data that lives on the publisher. The data gets full backups there.
– Mike M
Oct 29 '15 at 19:02
The servers are replication subscribers. They have copies of the data that lives on the publisher. The data gets full backups there.
– Mike M
Oct 29 '15 at 19:02
@MikeM So you have replicated DBs that get updated and inserted into regularly at the replicated DB level, correct? Huge long-running transactions will still cause the log file to grow in any recovery mode. If backups aren't needed, just keep them set to SIMPLE and see how it goes, but I thought with replication the logs are truncated at replication regardless. What version of SQL Server you're running all this on and setup how? Generally, data redundancy isn't meant to be a replacement for data backups as far as I know--your case may be unique perhaps--I assume your prod DBs are backed up?
– Pimp Juice IT
Oct 30 '15 at 19:46
@MikeM So you have replicated DBs that get updated and inserted into regularly at the replicated DB level, correct? Huge long-running transactions will still cause the log file to grow in any recovery mode. If backups aren't needed, just keep them set to SIMPLE and see how it goes, but I thought with replication the logs are truncated at replication regardless. What version of SQL Server you're running all this on and setup how? Generally, data redundancy isn't meant to be a replacement for data backups as far as I know--your case may be unique perhaps--I assume your prod DBs are backed up?
– Pimp Juice IT
Oct 30 '15 at 19:46
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
if you have a production database that is in use and has changes, in my experience, you should change the recovery model to full or bulk-logged at least,
you also need transaction backups so the log file wont get large.
although having replication can help you in recovering some of your data (replicated data), but you should never think of it as a backup.
having full recovery model not only is important for transaction backups but it also gives you recovery options in case of a data loss that you don't have with simple recovery model.
so I suggest you use full recovery model for all your databases.
this link, has a very useful information you can use.
answered Oct 30 '15 at 8:46
Sina HassanpourSina Hassanpour
34127
No, No, No. These servers are REPLICATION SUBSCRIBERS, transactional replication, one way. In a way, they are backups of data.
– Mike M
Oct 30 '15 at 14:39
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "182"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdba.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f119588%2fsimple-or-full-recovery%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
if you have a production database that is in use and has changes, in my experience, you should change the recovery model to full or bulk-logged at least,
you also need transaction backups so the log file wont get large.
although having replication can help you in recovering some of your data (replicated data), but you should never think of it as a backup.
having full recovery model not only is important for transaction backups but it also gives you recovery options in case of a data loss that you don't have with simple recovery model.
so I suggest you use full recovery model for all your databases.
this link, has a very useful information you can use.
answered Oct 30 '15 at 8:46
Sina HassanpourSina Hassanpour
34127
No, No, No. These servers are REPLICATION SUBSCRIBERS, transactional replication, one way. In a way, they are backups of data.
– Mike M
Oct 30 '15 at 14:39
add a comment |
if you have a production database that is in use and has changes, in my experience, you should change the recovery model to full or bulk-logged at least,
you also need transaction backups so the log file wont get large.
although having replication can help you in recovering some of your data (replicated data), but you should never think of it as a backup.
having full recovery model not only is important for transaction backups but it also gives you recovery options in case of a data loss that you don't have with simple recovery model.
so I suggest you use full recovery model for all your databases.
this link, has a very useful information you can use.
answered Oct 30 '15 at 8:46
Sina HassanpourSina Hassanpour
34127
No, No, No. These servers are REPLICATION SUBSCRIBERS, transactional replication, one way. In a way, they are backups of data.
– Mike M
Oct 30 '15 at 14:39
add a comment |
if you have a production database that is in use and has changes, in my experience, you should change the recovery model to full or bulk-logged at least,
you also need transaction backups so the log file wont get large.
although having replication can help you in recovering some of your data (replicated data), but you should never think of it as a backup.
having full recovery model not only is important for transaction backups but it also gives you recovery options in case of a data loss that you don't have with simple recovery model.
so I suggest you use full recovery model for all your databases.
this link, has a very useful information you can use.
answered Oct 30 '15 at 8:46
Sina HassanpourSina Hassanpour
34127
if you have a production database that is in use and has changes, in my experience, you should change the recovery model to full or bulk-logged at least,
you also need transaction backups so the log file wont get large.
although having replication can help you in recovering some of your data (replicated data), but you should never think of it as a backup.
having full recovery model not only is important for transaction backups but it also gives you recovery options in case of a data loss that you don't have with simple recovery model.
so I suggest you use full recovery model for all your databases.
this link, has a very useful information you can use.
answered Oct 30 '15 at 8:46
Sina HassanpourSina Hassanpour
34127
answered Oct 30 '15 at 8:46
Sina HassanpourSina Hassanpour
34127
answered Oct 30 '15 at 8:46
Sina HassanpourSina Hassanpour
34127
answered Oct 30 '15 at 8:46
Sina HassanpourSina Hassanpour
34127
34127
No, No, No. These servers are REPLICATION SUBSCRIBERS, transactional replication, one way. In a way, they are backups of data.
– Mike M
Oct 30 '15 at 14:39
add a comment |
No, No, No. These servers are REPLICATION SUBSCRIBERS, transactional replication, one way. In a way, they are backups of data.
– Mike M
Oct 30 '15 at 14:39
No, No, No. These servers are REPLICATION SUBSCRIBERS, transactional replication, one way. In a way, they are backups of data.
– Mike M
Oct 30 '15 at 14:39
No, No, No. These servers are REPLICATION SUBSCRIBERS, transactional replication, one way. In a way, they are backups of data.
– Mike M
Oct 30 '15 at 14:39
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Database Administrators Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdba.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f119588%2fsimple-or-full-recovery%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Why doesn't your data need to be backed up? Also why would the use of a maintenance script affect your position on the importance of your data?
– Erik
Oct 29 '15 at 17:52
Agree with Erik. Short answer is No, but maybe you're trying to get at something else here? Are you doing hourly snapshots of subscribers or something?
– Dave
Oct 29 '15 at 18:53
The servers are replication subscribers. They have copies of the data that lives on the publisher. The data gets full backups there.
– Mike M
Oct 29 '15 at 19:02
@MikeM So you have replicated DBs that get updated and inserted into regularly at the replicated DB level, correct? Huge long-running transactions will still cause the log file to grow in any recovery mode. If backups aren't needed, just keep them set to SIMPLE and see how it goes, but I thought with replication the logs are truncated at replication regardless. What version of SQL Server you're running all this on and setup how? Generally, data redundancy isn't meant to be a replacement for data backups as far as I know--your case may be unique perhaps--I assume your prod DBs are backed up?
– Pimp Juice IT
Oct 30 '15 at 19:46