|
|
|
SSCommitted
      
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 4:00 PM
Points: 1,910,
Visits: 1,602
|
|
|
|
|
|
SSCoach
         
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 10:25 AM
Points: 18,754,
Visits: 12,337
|
|
|
|
|
|
SSCrazy
      
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, May 13, 2013 11:21 AM
Points: 2,163,
Visits: 2,148
|
|
Great question, thanks Paul!
I'm really surprised at the number of people that think the log backups would be smaller. The logs files themselves yes, which is really the only reason I can see using the bulk-logged recovery model. It seems you either need complete disaster recovery (FULL) or you don't (SIMPLE).
|
|
|
|
|
SSCrazy
      
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 6:12 AM
Points: 2,526,
Visits: 3,620
|
|
Professional question & answer. Good start into the day.
Best Regards,
Chris Büttner
|
|
|
|
|
Ten Centuries
      
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, September 17, 2012 7:30 AM
Points: 1,038,
Visits: 679
|
|
Thanks Paul, i was thinking that the Log Backups will be smaller. again i learned something new today!
|
|
|
|
|
SSCommitted
      
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 3:39 AM
Points: 1,768,
Visits: 1,312
|
|
Hello Paul
Perfect Question!!!
To be specific I like the Answers provided are superb.
Anyway I pass it 
Cheers
--------------------------------------------------- "Thare are only 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't."
|
|
|
|
|
SSCertifiable
       
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 3:03 PM
Points: 5,244,
Visits: 7,061
|
|
Good question, Paul!
In your explanation, you write that log backups are about the same size as when full recovery had been uses. This matches my expectation, but in Books Online, it says: "The tradeoffs are bigger log backups and (...)" ms-help://MS.SQLCC.v9/MS.SQLSVR.v9.en/udb9/html/8cfea566-8f89-4581-b30d-c53f1f2c79eb.htm
Is this a documentation bug?
Hugo Kornelis, SQL Server MVP Visit my SQL Server blog: http://sqlblog.com/blogs/hugo_kornelis
|
|
|
|
|
SSC Veteran
      
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, January 01, 2013 11:12 PM
Points: 248,
Visits: 372
|
|
Good question.. Thanks
KSB ----------------------------- Thousands of candles can be lit from a single candle, and the life of the candle will not be shortened. Knowledge and happiness never decreases by being shared.” - Buddha
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Fame
       
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, March 14, 2013 4:15 AM
Points: 3,240,
Visits: 4,960
|
|
Good one.
Thanks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sometimes, winning is not an issue but trying. You can check my BLOG here
|
|
|
|
|
Ten Centuries
      
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, April 05, 2011 7:38 AM
Points: 1,303,
Visits: 70
|
|
Based on the explanation, the use of the term "a lot smaller" must be the reasoning for excluding answer "D". Even though http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa173529(SQL.80).aspx states.
The Bulk-Logged Recovery model provides protection against media failure combined with the best performance and minimal log space usage for certain large-scale or bulk copy operations. Though, as pointed out, the data extents are logged, insufficent detail is logged to allow point in time recovery which would indicate that "significant" data is not written for BULK_LOGGED operations and therefore smaller log backups.
|
|
|
|