[Info-vax] OpenVMS - file selection abnormally with Copy / Rename or user ignorance?

[David Froble]

JF Mezei wrote:
> On 15-03-29 08:26, Stephen Hoffman wrote:
> 
>> Now having a reliable online BACKUP mechanism for RMS files — which 
>> would likely involve application integration and/or use of RMS 
>> Journaling — would be far more interesting. 
> 
> 
> If indexed files are no longer in vogue, perhaps BACKUP needs to have
> some interface with the "official" database packages so that it could
> safely capture database files.
> 
> If you're going to have to duplicate a database to some sequential file
> before Backup can copy the data, why not have BACKUP save the
> intermediate on-disk copy and copy directly from the database (with the
> database system ensuring data consistency as it does when it does its
> own on-line backup.

That makes my head hurt.

Complexity means you're going to shoot your foot off ...

Simplicity means you have a better chance of missing your foot ...

The current BACKUP utility has a specific job.  Archiving files.

Database systems with an included backup capability understand the 
database, and can work with it.  They are part of the database.

To expect BACKUP to understand and work with every possible database 
product is, extravagant to say the least, and moronic is a better 
definition.  Would you expect the maintainers of BACKUP to constantly 
modify the product, every time a new database is developed?  I doubt 
that would be reasonable.