July 1, 2009 at 6:42 am
apologies for asking this on a Redgate sponsored site but, ahem, would any current users of Hyperbac out there care to share their experiences?
I am considering using it for its backup compression capability.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
July 1, 2009 at 3:17 pm
george sibbald (7/1/2009)
apologies for asking this on a Redgate sponsored site but, ahem, would any current users of Hyperbac out there care to share their experiences?.
Backup compression with Hyperbac is good. This I used for testing database Online Compression with Hyperbac.
Compression ratio is more or less same as compared with LiteSpeed. Main advantange with Hyperbac backup is it's backup syntax is similar to native sql server backup commands.
I am considering using it for its backup compression capability.
[\quote]
I think this is an good option reason being, after some time if you upgrade your box\boxes to SQL 2008 current backup code for backing up will work with out hyperbac as SQL 2008 can compress database backups while backing up.
July 1, 2009 at 3:40 pm
murthykalyani (7/1/2009)
george sibbald (7/1/2009)
apologies for asking this on a Redgate sponsored site but, ahem, would any current users of Hyperbac out there care to share their experiences?.
Backup compression with Hyperbac is good. This I used for testing database Online Compression with Hyperbac.
Compression ratio is more or less same as compared with LiteSpeed. Main advantange with Hyperbac backup is it's backup syntax is similar to native sql server backup commands.
I am considering using it for its backup compression capability.
[\quote]
I think this is an good option reason being, after some time if you upgrade your box\boxes to SQL 2008 current backup code for backing up will work with out hyperbac as SQL 2008 can compress database backups while backing up.
First, native compression is only available in SQL Server 2008 Enterprise Edition. If you are using Standard or less, you still need a third-party solution.
We have HyperBac where I work. I love it, as I can use native SQL backup/restore processes. It works well, and I have had no problems with it. My backups and restores are faster than native backups and restores without compression, and I am able to keep more backups on disk due to the compression.
July 1, 2009 at 3:49 pm
First, native compression is only available in SQL Server 2008 Enterprise Edition. If you are using Standard or less, you still need a third-party solution.
Lynn is absolutely correct and I agree with him.
July 1, 2009 at 3:56 pm
thanks guys for the feedback. If I use hyperbac it would be mostly on SQL 2005 and even some 2000 (all standard edition).
I will of course test this but as you are using it on full blown production apps already what is your experience with any performance hit when the backups run. As hyperbac compresses on the fly I wonder if it would cause high rates of paging as compression tools such as winzip and pkzip do.
cheers
george
---------------------------------------------------------------------
July 1, 2009 at 4:02 pm
george sibbald (7/1/2009)
thanks guys for the feedback. If I use hyperbac it would be mostly on SQL 2005 and even some 2000 (all standard edition).I will of course test this but as you are using it on full blown production apps already what is your experience with any performance hit when the backups run. As hyperbac compresses on the fly I wonder if it would cause high rates of paging as compression tools such as winzip and pkzip do.
cheers
george
Yes, I am using it in production. The backups/restores are faster and there is less impact on the server than when I used PKZip to compress backups after the fact, in fact PKZip was actually slower than compressed backups I get with HyperBac. I will admit PKZip made smaller zip files, but it added time to the backup/restore process that HyperBac has eliminated.
In addtion, I find the hyperBac team easy to work with and when I was first contacting them, they called me during my office hours (they are in Australia and I'm in the US).
They are very responsive and easy to work with.
July 1, 2009 at 5:13 pm
cheers Lynn.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
July 8, 2009 at 9:03 am
We have been using Hyperbac for over a year with no issues. We have been very happy with it.
July 8, 2009 at 9:06 am
I thought I'd just add that we have been using it for a year as well with no problems.
July 8, 2009 at 9:41 am
once again, thankyou.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
July 9, 2009 at 9:11 am
I'm late to the party, but here's my take.
Lynn clued me into Hyperbac when I was exploring this last year.
We've got it deployed on 3 SQL clusters backing up over 7000 databases on a nightly basis.
Backups are faster than native SQL backups, 75% smaller than native SQL backups, 40% quicker, and as has always been my experience not had any impact on performance during the backup.
When we installed it, we created 3 custom extensions to do zip compatible compression. bkz for full backups, dfz for differentials, and trz for transactionals. That was easy to do, then we setup our maintenance plans to backup to these file extensions and we were done. Hyperbac has just purred along since.
When we need to pull samples of databases down for QA testing (we're basically an ASP) we just hand the files off and our testing team uses Winrar to decompress and then restore them.
July 9, 2009 at 9:12 am
I'm late to the party, but here's my take.
Lynn clued me into Hyperbac when I was exploring this last year.
We've got it deployed on 3 SQL clusters backing up over 7000 databases on a nightly basis.
Backups are faster than native SQL backups, 75% smaller than native SQL backups, 40% quicker, and as has always been my experience not had any impact on performance during the backup.
When we installed it, we created 3 custom extensions to do zip compatible compression. bkz for full backups, dfz for differentials, and trz for transactionals. That was easy to do, then we setup our maintenance plans to backup to these file extensions and we were done. Hyperbac has just purred along since.
When we need to pull samples of databases down for QA testing (we're basically an ASP) we just hand the files off and our testing team uses Winrar to decompress and then restore them.
July 9, 2009 at 9:22 am
Sorry on the double post... every time I post I get errors these days. Not sure why.
July 10, 2009 at 3:53 pm
Agree with the above. They are perhaps the most responsive company I've ever dealt with.
The native syntax is one of the biggest selling points to me - no need to change any existing scripts.
July 11, 2009 at 7:31 am
We've got it deployed on 3 SQL clusters backing up over 7000 databases on a nightly basis.
quote]
7000? wow. I'm sold, now to convince the management and a client who wants me to use redgate. I just don't want to change my existing backup\recovery strategy for the sake of compression.
cheers mark and matt.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 55 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply