Database Differential Backup Promotion Logic

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

In modern network environments, performing differential backups without data loss requires ensuring that no intervening backup by another vendor has altered the application data since the last full backup, which can lead to unnecessary promotion of differential backups to full backups, consuming resources and causing downtime.

Innovation Solution

Implementing a check mechanism at the time of differential backup to determine if an intervening backup by another vendor has occurred, and if so, identifying whether it poses a risk of data loss, thereby deciding whether to promote the differential backup to a full backup, with specific exemptions for non-risky backup types like transaction log backups.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If a differential backup is performed without checking for intervening backups, then backup speed and simplicity are improved, but data loss risk increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvebackup speedVSAvoiddata loss risk

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs a preliminary check before executing the differential backup to determine if an intervening backup has occurred. This advance verification allows the system to identify potential data loss risks before they materialize, enabling proactive decision-making about whether to proceed with the differential backup or promote it to a full backup instead.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system introduces an intermediary check mechanism that acts as a mediator between the differential backup request and the actual backup execution. This intermediary layer queries backup metadata and vendor information to assess the risk of data loss, thereby protecting the integrity of the backup process without significantly impacting overall backup performance.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Reliability

If a check for intervening backups is performed, then data loss risk is reduced, but backup time and complexity increase

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedata loss preventionVSAvoidbackup time

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system extracts only the critical information needed for the check - specifically the backup vendor identifier and backup type from backup metadata - rather than performing a comprehensive analysis of all backup parameters. This selective extraction minimizes the time and computational resources required for the intervening backup check while still effectively identifying data loss risks.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes the parameter being checked from a comprehensive backup state verification to a specific vendor and backup type identification. By focusing on these key parameters rather than analyzing the entire backup state, the system achieves reliable data loss prevention with minimal impact on backup execution time.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #35Parameter changes

3Reliability

If differential backup is promoted to full backup unnecessarily, then data integrity is ensured, but resource consumption increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedata integrityVSAvoidresource consumption

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs a partial check focusing only on the critical aspects of backup integrity - vendor identification and backup type classification - rather than a complete verification of all data integrity factors. This partial action approach is sufficient to prevent unnecessary full backup promotions while avoiding the excessive resource consumption that would result from more comprehensive verification methods.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #16Partial or excessive action

4Productivity

If full backup is performed during maintenance periods only, then backup efficiency is improved, but availability of complete backup data may be compromised

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvebackup efficiencyVSAvoidbackup data availability

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements a feedback mechanism where the check for intervening backups provides information that determines the appropriate backup strategy. Based on the feedback from the check - whether an intervening backup occurred and its type - the system dynamically decides whether to perform a differential backup or promote to full backup, thereby maintaining backup data availability while optimizing backup efficiency during maintenance periods.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS11157367B1Promotional logic during database differential backup

Publication Date: 2021.10.26 EMC IP HLDG CO LLC

AI summary

Techniques to back up data are disclosed. In various embodiments, an indication to perform a differential backup of a database is received. It is verified that a full backup to be referenced by the differential backup is available on backup media. It is determined that no intervening backup was performed subsequent to the full backup that would create a risk of data loss in the event a recovery operation based on the differential backup were performed, including by ignoring any intervening backup that may have been performed but is of a type that would not give rise to such a risk of data loss. The differential backup is performed, without promoting to full backup, based on least in part on said determination.