Francisco Tapia
fhtapia at gmail.com
Fri Sep 11 12:53:49 CDT 2009
ya can't! literally, this thing is engineered back in the days when database engines couldn't support this many tables and there are literally tables within tables using blobs or other techniques, so there are actually more than 70k tables, but only slightly over 70k physical ones. going back to your original post, I didn't realize you ment DATA compression vs Backup compression. You will want plenty of cores of course since there will be some overhead on CPU usage. but because there is less data being handled you will see some speed increases especially in a redundant database like yours, it consumes less I/O so you can push more data through it. It seems that you would benefit most from what they call ROW compression; http://blogs.msdn.com/sqlserverstorageengine/archive/2007/11/12/types-of-data-compression-in-sql-server-2008.aspx -Francisco http://sqlthis.blogspot.com | Tsql and More... On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 10:36 AM, jwcolby <jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com>wrote: > SEVENTY THOUSAND TABLES? > > 8( > > How could anyone possibly know what is in there? > > John W. Colby > www.ColbyConsulting.com > > > Francisco Tapia wrote: > > at the risk of sounding like a salesman, I couldn't agree more, the > copyto > > feature has been in the product since sql backup 5, but also one of the > cool > > new features that I like is the network resilience option, so if your > backup > > fails you can choose how many retries it does and how long you want the > > process to pause for between re-tries. very nice stuff indeed. > > > > the tightest compression of course comes at a price and that is it takes > a > > lot of cpu and memory resources so it's good to run when the system is > idle, > > but if you have a high production system I always schedule log backups to > > occur with the highest speed instead, that way a log backup does not tie > up > > resources for too long. > > > > I haven't had a chance to test sql prompt 4 have you? from what i've > been > > reading it's good stuff and faster than sql prompt3 which I do use and > love > > to use. > > > > recently i moved away from Idera's Diagnostic Manager (an expensive > > monitoring tool) and started using RedGates new Sql Response. It > actually > > works better for me especially because I can keep track of my fragmented > > tables in our SAP systems that literally have over 70k tables you want to > > talk a database from hell? look no further.. this thing is a beast. > > > > -Francisco > > http://sqlthis.blogspot.com | Tsql and More... > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 9:10 AM, Arthur Fuller <fuller.artful at gmail.com > >wrote: > > > >> I couldn't agree more strongly, Francisco! In fact, I have persuaded > >> several > >> clients to purchase the Red Gate Toolbelt simply by demo'ing SQL Backup > >> from > >> my laptop, and illustrating that backups take 1/3 the time and occupy > 1/3 > >> the space. And now with the latest version, the space is down to 1/4. > >> Awesome technology. I especially love the feature that lets you copy the > >> backup to another machine automatically. That is beautiful! > >> Arthur > >> > >> On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 11:38 AM, Francisco Tapia <fhtapia at gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Compression backups? > >>> one thing to remember is that if you run a backup to a backup device > you > >>> can't have an uncompressed backup with a compressed backup. as far as > >> cost > >>> it might be cheaper to invest in redgate's backup software wich is fast > >> and > >>> robust we use it here to backup our 2TB databases. for 295 you really > >> can't > >>> beat the price on other solutions... its definitely cheaper than going > >> 2008 > >>> enterprise. > >>> > >>> > >>> more info here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb964719.aspx > >>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms186865.aspx > >>> > >>> alternitavely you may wish to use a free compression product such as: > >>> http://www.idera.com/Products/Free-Tools/SQL-safe-Freeware-Edition/ > >>> > >>> -Francisco > >>> http://sqlthis.blogspot.com | Tsql and More... > >>> > >>> > >>> On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 7:05 AM, jwcolby <jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com > >>>> wrote: > >>>> Does anyone have experience with using compression in 2008? I > >> understand > >>>> it is only available in > >>>> the enterprise edition? > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> John W. Colby > >>>> www.ColbyConsulting.com > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> dba-SQLServer mailing list > >>>> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com > >>>> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver > >>>> http://www.databaseadvisors.com > >>>> > >>>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> dba-SQLServer mailing list > >>> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com > >>> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver > >>> http://www.databaseadvisors.com > >>> > >>> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> dba-SQLServer mailing list > >> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com > >> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver > >> http://www.databaseadvisors.com > >> > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > dba-SQLServer mailing list > > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com > > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver > > http://www.databaseadvisors.com > > > > > _______________________________________________ > dba-SQLServer mailing list > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver > http://www.databaseadvisors.com > >