Subject | Re: why does restore last so long?? |
---|---|
Author | Adam |
Post date | 2005-07-15T23:58:15Z |
--- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, Nando Dessena <nando@d...> wrote:
and defraging are both generally extremely I/O intensive. However
unless MS are doing something and not telling us, I can not see how
copying a file would corrupt the source (certainly the validity of the
destination is pot luck).
I think that defrag would skip moving any files with write locks and
probably also read locks.
In any case, running both simultaneously would slow the system to a
crawl. I doubt the performance problem of the restore is related to
fragmentation, but probably because the source is on the same physical
drive as the destination which forces it to continuously jump.
Is it possible to turn off Forced Writes during the restore operation
? (after all if there is a power failure during a restore, you need to
start again anyway).
Adam
> Jason,safe?
>
> J> What kind of Defrag system would let you defrag with it not being
> J> It should work just fine.I would not do it for the simple reason that both running a database
>
and defraging are both generally extremely I/O intensive. However
unless MS are doing something and not telling us, I can not see how
copying a file would corrupt the source (certainly the validity of the
destination is pot luck).
I think that defrag would skip moving any files with write locks and
probably also read locks.
In any case, running both simultaneously would slow the system to a
crawl. I doubt the performance problem of the restore is related to
fragmentation, but probably because the source is on the same physical
drive as the destination which forces it to continuously jump.
Is it possible to turn off Forced Writes during the restore operation
? (after all if there is a power failure during a restore, you need to
start again anyway).
Adam