|
R Bruce Hoffman wrote: > Well, defect... I think what you will hear is "working as designed". Rather poorly designed, it appears (to me at least). > I grant you that it would be much easier if they supported all that > renaming... but do you really want a restore operation mucking around > with data in a file? I may be in the minority here, but I for one don't > want _data_ messed with by the restore itself. It's not data, as far as I'm concerned ... no more than the link between a logical and physical file is (meta data at best). Yes, I grant you, I can query the system tables that contain the information, but the system is (or should be) managing the information in those tables. When I do a restore and change the target library, it is ABSOLUTELY the job of the OS to change the contents of those meta data files so it fits with the restore command. david -- David Gibbs david@xxxxxxxxxxxx Receipt of this message does not grant you permission to send me Unsolicited Commercial Email
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.