Post reply

backup tool

  • February 3, 2015 at 1:02 pm

    #295060

    We are trying to pick between redgate backup pro, quest litespeed and idera sqlsafe. We have about 10 to 15 servers with very small databases. I am supposed to come up with suggestions, but I have never worked with any of these tools before. I would like some suggestions, please.

    Thanks.

  • February 3, 2015 at 1:44 pm

    #1775138

    To be honest, I'd use SQL Server native backups for such a small number of servers.

    --Jeff Moden

    RBAR is pronounced "ree-bar" and is a "Modenism" for Row-By-Agonizing-Row.
    First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code:
    ________Stop thinking about what you want to do to a ROW... think, instead, of what you want to do to a COLUMN.

    Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.

    Helpful Links:
    How to post code problems
    How to Post Performance Problems
    Create a Tally Function (fnTally)

  • February 3, 2015 at 1:48 pm

    #1775142

    That's what I have been doing right now, but my manager wants me to centralize everything with regular restore jobs in place. I have been asked to come up with a backup tool, and these 3 tools seem like they will serve the purpose, but I can't make up my mind as to which one I should choose.

  • February 3, 2015 at 8:35 pm

    #1775186

    Srl832 (2/3/2015)

    That's what I have been doing right now, but my manager wants me to centralize everything with regular restore jobs in place. I have been asked to come up with a backup tool, and these 3 tools seem like they will serve the purpose, but I can't make up my mind as to which one I should choose.

    I don't see how those tools are going to help with restores compared to the native backups.

    However, you have given much detail about exactly what you are trying to accomplish, so it would be helpful if you explained in more detail.

  • February 3, 2015 at 8:57 pm

    #1775189

    well, what the management wants is a tool that will centralize the backup process. Right now, I am taking SQL server backups using the Ola Hallengren script. We have our own application that performs index maintenance on all database servers.

    It is a growing company and they are going to add more servers very soon. When that happens, I want to be able to just add the servers to an ongoing backup policy as well as the index maintenance task rather than logging into the server, running the script and scheduling the backup tasks all over again.

  • February 3, 2015 at 10:42 pm

    #1775193

    I might be the only one but I don't care for central management tools for backups not because any of them are particularly bad but because if the box that the central management is on dies, so do ALL of the backups. I'd rather push a good strong set of backup scripts and jobs to each server and have the servers report on what they've done in a morning report. I keep my morning reports separate for each server because I don't have that many servers but they could easily report to a central system for summarization.

    I recommend that you remind management of how many eggs break if they'll all in one basket that drops. 😀

    --Jeff Moden

    RBAR is pronounced "ree-bar" and is a "Modenism" for Row-By-Agonizing-Row.
    First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code:
    ________Stop thinking about what you want to do to a ROW... think, instead, of what you want to do to a COLUMN.

    Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.

    Helpful Links:
    How to post code problems
    How to Post Performance Problems
    Create a Tally Function (fnTally)

  • February 3, 2015 at 10:47 pm

    #1775194

    I will let the management know exactly that. I like it. 😀

    Thanks.

  • February 3, 2015 at 11:02 pm

    #1775198

    Sorry. I may have jumped the gun a bit on that recommendation. Again, I'm a bit ignorant as to what some of these central backup systems do by name but there are two types. There's the "all eggs in on basket" type I was talking about and those should definitely be avoided.

    There's another type and I don't know by name which ones (if any) fall into the right category and that category would be the one where the backup management system does actually push code and jobs to each system and then the systems would each act autonomously until you need to make a change. THAT kind of system would be OK. Again, I don't now if any of the central management systems you named would do that. Additional research is necessary before you give management the "egg basket" lecture.

    --Jeff Moden

    RBAR is pronounced "ree-bar" and is a "Modenism" for Row-By-Agonizing-Row.
    First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code:
    ________Stop thinking about what you want to do to a ROW... think, instead, of what you want to do to a COLUMN.

    Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.

    Helpful Links:
    How to post code problems
    How to Post Performance Problems
    Create a Tally Function (fnTally)

  • February 4, 2015 at 3:58 am

    #1775239

    Just to toss another point of view in here, admittedly one that is vendor centric.

    I work for Red Gate Software. I've used both our products and litespeed in production systems. There are a few things these products do offer above and beyond what you get with the native tool. First up is centralized management. But, not as Jeff says, a single place that runs the backups. From Red Gate SQL Backup, you have an individual Agent job on each server for whatever backup you set (or even more than one, one for Full, one for logs, one for a special backup every other Thursday because we really like Thursdays... joke, as many jobs as you need). We just have our tool act as a central clearing house so that you can see the status of all your backups across all the servers under management from one location. Also, you can create backups for all the servers under management from one location. It's pretty good.

    Next, we offer better compression than Native compression. It's also a little bit faster on some systems (a bit slower on others, TANSTAFL always applies). In addition we have automation around testing backups, setting up mirroring and other functionality that's not coming to mind at the moment.

    There's nothing wrong with native backup (well, compression is weak, but it's there). But, if you want added functionality and ease of use, that's why you would use a third party tool.

    "The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood"
    - Theodore Roosevelt

    Author of:
    SQL Server Execution Plans
    SQL Server Query Performance Tuning

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply