X-Received: by 10.68.254.230 with SMTP id al6mr13549941pbd.6.1387918437217; Tue, 24 Dec 2013 12:53:57 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.182.72.225 with SMTP id g1mr30955obv.7.1387916802550; Tue, 24 Dec 2013 12:26:42 -0800 (PST) Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.glorb.com!y3no13339150pbx.0!news-out.google.com!l9ni207qay.0!nntp.google.com!p15no42229583qaj.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.databases.ms-sqlserver Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2013 12:26:42 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2601:4:1980:483:293a:407f:aabf:1cc8; posting-account=qJFqbQkAAACYQSLN0-cvP6ydkRfuOu6u NNTP-Posting-Host: 2601:4:1980:483:293a:407f:aabf:1cc8 References: User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <2eaff76e-38d3-493c-9d67-22c337a5d1af@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: 'Backup Database' permission From: Mark D Powell Injection-Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2013 20:53:57 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: csiph.com comp.databases.ms-sqlserver:1636 On Friday, December 6, 2013 5:41:08 PM UTC-5, Erland Sommarskog wrote: > Chad Jones (noreply@noreply.com) writes: >=20 > > Yes, I have no access to the tape backups or the tape backup=20 >=20 > > device so that is not an option. I do however have a full copy=20 >=20 > > of SQL Server 2008 R2 running on my dev machine. It is a=20 >=20 > > trivial matter for me to restore a .bak file from another=20 >=20 > > server on to my dev server. Which is why I was asking about=20 >=20 > > the 'Backup Database' permission. I have full R/W on the other=20 >=20 > > server but no 'Backup Database' permission. I'm sure the dba's=20 >=20 > > wouldn't give it to me if I asked for it because of the=20 >=20 > > aforementioned restrictions on the tape device. Even the dba's=20 >=20 > > don't have full access to the tape device. I was hoping that=20 >=20 > > if they could give me permission to backup to disk only that=20 >=20 > > would be the way to go. I don't even want to ask these guys to=20 >=20 > > run a script for me to backup to a disk location. Whatever=20 >=20 > > solution I find has to be something I can run myself. Thanks >=20 >=20 > Hm, do you know for sure that they have a tape device? I don't work >=20 > in operations, so I don't know how common tape devices are today,=20 >=20 > but if I were to set up a backup (well restore) strategy for a database, >=20 > I would certainly not add any tape devices to the mix, at least not >=20 > as the primary backup target. (Possibly copy the backup file on disk=20 >=20 > to tape in a second step.) >=20 >=20 > And even if there is a tape device, I don't see why the DBAs would not >=20 > give you permission because of the tape device. Certainly, if I was a=20 >=20 > DBA, and a random developer would ask for permissions to backup=20 >=20 > databases on a production server, or even a test/QA server, I would not >=20 > do this lightly. If you have a legit reason to have a copy of the=20 >=20 > database, I would rather take the backup myself, and put it somewhere >=20 > you can read it. >=20 > --=20 >=20 > Erland Sommarskog, Stockholm, esquel@sommarskog.se This is a little late but on the question of how common tape devices are to= day, I would say very common in larger shops though the device may not appe= ar to be tape to the source. Our Windows team install software on our Wind= ows servers that dumps changed files to a tape on a daily basis. The tape = unit is actually a set of disks in front of several tape drives. The tape = management system dumps the disk contents to tape. Physical files are stri= pped across tape units. The total data store is in the hundreds of T-byt= es. That would be a lot of disk. HTH -- Mark D Powell --