June 25, 2008 at 4:49 pm
I have to agree with 7-Zip[/url] . I use a script in our Maintenance Plan to 7-zip the files and Robocopy them to two seperate locations; one local, the other off-site. Our last Full of our primary databases was 24GB, 7-Zip compressed it down to 2.12GB.
Our Script:
DECLARE @sql varchar(2000)
SET @sql = 'DEL C:\Backup\MSSQL\FULL\*.7z'
EXEC MASTER..XP_CMDSHELL @sql
SET @sql = 'FOR %i IN (C:\Backup\MSSQL\FULL\*.bak) DO "C:\Program Files\7-Zip\7z.exe" a %~fi.7z %~fi -slp'
EXEC MASTER..XP_CMDSHELL @sql
SET @sql = 'DEL C:\Backup\MSSQL\FULL\*.bak'
EXEC MASTER..XP_CMDSHELL @sql
SET @sql = 'ROBOCOPY C:\Backup\MSSQL\FULL\ \\\nnas1\Backup\SQ1\MSSQL\FULL\ *.7z /ZB /NP /MIR /LOG+:"D:\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\LOG\NAS1-FULL-%date:~10,4%%date:~4,2%%date:~7,2%.TXT"'
EXEC MASTER..XP_CMDSHELL @sql
June 25, 2008 at 11:00 pm
I was manually zipping backup files using PKZip. and it did a great job. Problem was: 1) it was manual, and 2) it was time intensive.
Using HyperBac cut backup and restore times by about 50% and disk usage for backup files by 80% depending on the databases.
The benefits of products like Litespeed, SQL Backup, SQL Safe, and HyperBac is not only the compression of the backups on the fly, but the reduced time it takes to complete backups and restores.
😎
June 25, 2008 at 11:29 pm
[font="Verdana"]You are already getting a good compression ratio.. Better go with your way! You can go for third party tools for compressing backups, bt you need to pay for that![/font]
Regards..Vidhya Sagar
SQL-Articles
June 26, 2008 at 6:32 am
I'll agree, you have a process that is working, you don't need to change it unless your requirements change.
One of the things I sometimes needed to do was restore a training or development database. Doing that over the network directly from a native backup file took about an hour. Moving and uncompressing a compressed file then restoring still took between 30 to 45 minutes. HyperBac does it in 30 minutes over the network.
Also, if needed, we can encrypt the backup as well with only minimal changes to our processes. My testing showed that the backup/restore process is still quicker, but that the compressed files are slightly larger.
The same is propably true of the other products.
😎
June 26, 2008 at 6:34 am
Lynn Pettis (6/25/2008)
I was manually zipping backup files using PKZip. and it did a great job. Problem was: 1) it was manual, and 2) it was time intensive.Using HyperBac cut backup and restore times by about 50% and disk usage for backup files by 80% depending on the databases.
The benefits of products like Litespeed, SQL Backup, SQL Safe, and HyperBac is not only the compression of the backups on the fly, but the reduced time it takes to complete backups and restores.
😎
I totally agree with Lynn, I've used Litespeed and SQL Safe. Outstanding products. Backups dropped from around 2.5 hours (native) to around 45 minutes. Restores nearly the same. Of course the disk savings with compression (and encryption) were incredible as well. And since we were on SQL2K at the time, we had the added benefit of being able to do restores at the table or object level if we wanted/needed to.
-- You can't be late until you show up.
Viewing 5 posts - 31 through 34 (of 34 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply