There's a somewhat lengthy discussion of Transaction Logs in Microsoft's instructions for setting up a database mirror. We've never bothered with Transaction Logs in the past; do we really need to now?
Isn't the Transaction Log effectively an incremental backup that follows a full backup?
Unless the database drive fails while building the mirror, won't the mirror get from the primary all of the events that occurred while the backup file was being copied and restored to the mirror server?
It seems to me that the full backup alone might be slower, but it would be simpler.
When building a mirror, Microsoft's documentation instructs us to restore the last full backup (plus the last differential, if there is one) and all subsequent Transaction Logs.
Unless one puts the database in single-user mode while building the mirror, there will be at least a small activity gap between the last data restored and the time the mirror goes live.
Will the mirror fill in that gap (as it does when it temporarily goes off-line)?
There's a caveat in the instructions if the database path is different on the mirror server: we cannot "add" TLs. The activity gap could be quite big if one had to skip several TLs.
That's what I meant above: wouldn't it be simpler to ignore the Transaction Logs when building the mirror, and just let the mirror fill in the gap?