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