Please start any new threads on our new
site at https://forums.sqlteam.com. We've got lots of great SQL Server
experts to answer whatever question you can come up with.
| Author |
Topic |
|
derrickleggett
Pointy Haired Yak DBA
4184 Posts |
 Posted - 2004-06-25 : 14:06:43
|
| I know that backups are much faster and smaller for backing up the database. How much slower is it on restores though. I need to restore about 160gb a night from these backups.MeanOldDBAderrickleggett@hotmail.comWhen life gives you a lemon, fire the DBA. |
|
|
tkizer
Almighty SQL Goddess
38200 Posts |
Posted - 2004-06-25 : 14:11:04
|
| How much slower? Hmmm, hard to say, but at least 1.5 times slower than a regular restore of a .bak file. That's what I've seen so far. For the dbs that we use SQL LiteSpeed, I rarely need to perform a restore.Tara |
 |
|
|
eyechart
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
3575 Posts |
Posted - 2004-06-25 : 14:38:27
|
| I evaluated SQL Litespeed a while back and found the restore times to be faster (slightly) than normal restores. I didn't test on a large database though, our test db was only around 5GB.derrick, you can always download their eval and test it out. I would be interested to see performance numbers w/a database of that size.-ec |
|
|
|
tkizer
Almighty SQL Goddess
38200 Posts |
Posted - 2004-06-25 : 14:42:36
|
| I haven't performed restores from it on anything less than 50GB. But then my performance degradation could have been for other reasons. I would perform a test now for you, but I don't have a test box for this specific system that has sufficient disk space.Tara |
|
|
|
eyechart
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
3575 Posts |
Posted - 2004-06-25 : 15:03:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by tduggan
I haven't performed restores from it on anything less than 50GB. But then my performance degradation could have been for other reasons. I would perform a test now for you, but I don't have a test box for this specific system that has sufficient disk space.
Tara, I wouldn't doubt your results for a second. I think my results might be wrong, or I am remembering things incorrectly. I'm actually trying to find my writeup of this that I made last year to see if I am remembering this correctly. btw, I also looked at SQLzip at the same time. fwiw, sqlzip paled compared to sqllitespeed - I atleast can remember that!-ec |
|
|
|
derrickleggett
Pointy Haired Yak DBA
4184 Posts |
Posted - 2004-06-26 : 22:47:29
|
| Well, I'll be downloading the trial version next week and giving it a whirl. It should be interesting to see the comparisons. I'll let everyone know when we find out.MeanOldDBAderrickleggett@hotmail.comWhen life gives you a lemon, fire the DBA. |
|
|
|
Wanderer
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
1168 Posts |
Posted - 2004-06-28 : 04:14:50
|
| Derrick, my previous site had a similar requirement (backup and restore nightly).We did some limited testing on this, on 80GB databases. The results were ... varied. Some seemed to restore at a "reasonable" comparison to restore (+- 5% of restore times for normal restores, whereas we had 2 restores that took exceptionally long (4 TIMES as long, and another that took 7.5 times as long). we tested by restoring 10 times, each way, with server reboots between each restore(maybe unnecessary, but I'd been a SQL server dba for about 9 month's at the time).Having said that, that was ... hmm ... 3 years ago, also using an eval copy. Given all the good press and report's I've heard about it, maybe I should relook at it.*##* *##* *##* *##* Chaos, Disorder and Panic ... my work is done here! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SQLLiteSpeed Restore Times