SQL Server 2005 Backup Third Party Tools
-
I am interested in obtaining a tool for database backup/recovery with compression and encryption that is cluster aware. I am mainly concerned with decreasing the time required for backup/restore of large databases. Compression is important as well, but not as critical as time. It seems that SQL Backup by Red Gate and LiteSpeed from Quest are the two products that fit my requirements.
I would like to hear opinions from members who have had experience with one or both of these or other tools. Specifically I would like to know the amount of improvement in both time and size between SQL Server native client backup/restore operations and these tools. I am operating on a Windows 2003 cluster with SQL Server 2005.
-
Microsoft itself is using Lightspeed to backup their VLDB databases. Hence I won't hesitate to go with Lightspeed.
But if you are looking something more beyond only Backup/Restore and to have SQL TOOLS you can think about Redgate. I guess both will give more or less similar performance.
---------------------------------------------------
"Thare are only 10 types of people in the world:
Those who understand binary, and those who don't." -
Of the many vendors out there, to my knowledge LiteSpeed is the only one cluster aware. A couple of the others try to be, but they're really not. You can run them on a cluster, but it takes some effort, whereas litespeed IS cluster aware and installs like a dream.
Watch my free SQL Server Tutorials at:
http://MidnightDBA.com
Blog Author of:
DBA Rant – http://www.MidnightDBA.com/DBARantMinion Maintenance is FREE:
-
we currently use Veritas Netbackup and we are looking to go to Evault in the next few months. EMC also owns Avamar which was OK, but very buggy when we tested it a few years back before they got bought out. Evault is pretty good, but buggy as well
-
I've used both Red Gate and LiteSpeed products. As far as compression and speed, they are pretty much the same. LiteSpeed product has far more bells and whistles to go along with it, much of them I never touch. LiteSpeed is the only Cluster aware product. It's also far more expensive. I'd go with Red Gate if it's only for compression and speed, but if you have any other needs you might as well get the best product available - LiteSpeed.
-
Hi,
Currently using Litespeed for backup of 1TB+ database, which compresses down to 103GB within 2hrs, which is pretty good. Depending on your RTO, this may fit or may not, but if your requirement is shorter and your database infrastructure is supported by a SAN, you should look at using SAN vendor Snapshot technology, which works at the block level for backups and restores.
Hope this helps,
Phillip Cox
-
The times and size saved are pretty much the same fo rboth products. I've seen 70% in space savings as well as 50% in time saved running the backup (in both products). It really depends on your DB's. If you have many texts or blog fields, the backup may take LONGER then native because these fields can not be compressed, but the product still ttys to do it.
-
Red Gates' SQL Backup has a nice transaction log restore feature, where you could just pass something like this:
EXEC master..sqlbackup '-sql "RESTORE LOG mydb FROM DISK = [e:\backups\mydb*.sqb] WITH RECOVERY"'
and it will pick up all the transaction log backup files in the e:\backups folder matching the search pattern, sort them, and restore each backup set in the right sequential order. Beats having to restore each transaction log backup set individually, which is error prone and time consuming when you have a lot of logs to restore.
Also, SQL Backup does this by reading the backup details from each files' header, so you don't need access to the backup servers' msdb database, which means you can use this feature on any standby server.
SQL BAK Explorer - read SQL Server backup file details without SQL Server.
Supports backup files created with SQL Server 2005 up to SQL Server 2017. -
I've only really used Redgate's SQL backup aside from the native client...i found it be very good in terms of speed and compression.
Gethyn Elliswww.gethynellis.com
-
If all you're looking for are compressed backups with a little extra restore functionality take a look at HyperBac. They're a young startup, but they're not new to the backup game. I'll tell you how this fits into the picture.
HyperBac is a project of Jeffrey Aven. Jeffrey Aven was the original developer of LiteSpeed back when it was under DBAssociates. Then, Walter Scott bought DBAssociates and turned it into Imceda. He then turned around and sold Imceda to Quest for around 60mill. Walter left Quest shortly after and went to Acronis. Both Walter and Jeffrey have been under noncompete agreements and both their agreements are now expired. So Jeffrey started up HyperBac which is a SQL backup util, but it works more at the driver level. So you don't have to alter any of your code, and SQL doesn't have any idea of the existence of HyperBac. You just define where you want the backups to be compressed and it happens at the OS level when SQL takes a backup.
Now, Walter also has a new SQL backup util, but it's really not ready for any real SQL shops. It's ok, but everything has to be coded manually, and the interface isn't very stellar.
Now, as RedGate's product goes... I don't agree with the way they do everything, but I have worked with it and it's a nice tool. You can't really go wrong. Another bit of history here too. RedGate's tool used to be called MiniSQLBackup written by Peter Yeoh. At least I think I'm remembering that correctly. Anyway though, RedGate bought it and turned it into the product it is today. It's really nothing like it was when they bought it so they've definitely made it their own.
Yeoh still has products. You can see his stuff at http://www.yohz.com
Watch my free SQL Server Tutorials at:
http://MidnightDBA.com
Blog Author of:
DBA Rant – http://www.MidnightDBA.com/DBARantMinion Maintenance is FREE:
-
i talked to Litespeed yesterday and probably won't buy them. nice feature set but it's too decentralized for us and backing up to a UNC path scared me.
we will probably buy into Evault in the next month or so. it's not perfect, but all the backups go into a SQL 2005 express edition db rather than separate files and it has a better server side app with a lot of management and the ability to dump old backups to different storage or tape
-
Hi SQL Noob,
In a previous post, you said it was buggy...
Does that mean that you are happy to buy a buggy database backup software :crying: or that it's not buggy anymore 🙂 ?
-
i've been using Veritas since 2001 and it has had bugs as well. i'm sure Litespeed has bugs since they have new versions and patches. MS maintenance plans can be a nightmare. using windows backup is OK but managing the files can probably be a nightmare and there were some crazy restore bugs in Exchange 2000.
the problems with evault are mostly dumping to secondary storage and one reason is they used to use mysql and changed to sql 2005 for their engine. and their dev team is working on fixing the bugs we reported as with any other vendor.
in my view i will take the bugs over UNC path backups that are a lot easier to delete than Evault's db. personally i would prefer for management to authorize a purchase of a new tape library with LTO-4 or whatever the latest version is because i prefer tapes to disk backups. but in the area of disk backups i will take Evault, Avamar and Veritas with their bugs over Litespeed just because i prefer centralized control and knowing that no one can accidentaly delete the evault db like they can files in a UNC path
-
I don't understand how you can say LiteSpeed is too decentralized. They push everything up to a central repository and you can do all of your reporting from there. I've been on LS for years and their model is very solid. I don't know who you talked to over there, but you either misunderstood them or they just don't know what they're talking about.
Watch my free SQL Server Tutorials at:
http://MidnightDBA.com
Blog Author of:
DBA Rant – http://www.MidnightDBA.com/DBARantMinion Maintenance is FREE:
-
Hyperbac, Red Gate, Litespeed, all work well.
The latter two are cluster aware, not sure about Hyperbac.
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 29 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply