October 8, 2007 at 11:43 am
I am starting to migrate form SQL 2000 to SQL 2005. It appears to me that backup speeds are faster in SQL 2005 in comparison to SQL 2000.
Is this really true ... and if so why ... and are there other improvements in SQL 2005 backup Vs SQL 2000?
Appreciate you feedback.
Ron Kaufman
🙂
October 8, 2007 at 3:34 pm
It's probably faster. Haven't done enough testing to know, but they usually tweak the process with each version to run a bit smoother.
Some better options with filegroup backup / restore, worth looking into if you have large dbs or lots of images/BLOBs/read only data.
October 12, 2007 at 3:35 am
This article gives a quick view of the enhancements in the 2005 backups
http://searchsqlserver.techtarget.com/tip/0,289483,sid87_gci1134737,00.html
October 12, 2007 at 9:08 am
Going from 2000 to 2005 we rewrote some of the backup internals around multi-threaded scheduling and buffer management (backup uses its own schedulers inside SQL Server) - this may account for the speed increase you're seeing.
One of the coolest things we added was single page restore (online in Enterprise Edition) - the ability to restore a single page from a backup and apply the transaction log to just that page to bring it up-to-date.
Paul Randal
CEO, SQLskills.com: Check out SQLskills online training!
Blog:www.SQLskills.com/blogs/paul Twitter: @PaulRandal
SQL MVP, Microsoft RD, Contributing Editor of TechNet Magazine
Author of DBCC CHECKDB/repair (and other Storage Engine) code of SQL Server 2005
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply