dbambo2000 wrote:

> Hello,
> I am attempting to restore a 15GB database (containing 18 thousand
> tables) from a remote Win2003 server to my local WinXP Pro Pentium 4
> system with 768MB Ram. I began the restore about 20 hours ago and
> thus far it has restored about 5.7 gigabytes. At this rate it will
> take a few days to complete the restore. Is this normal? Can I do
> anything to speed things up?
> I understand that gbak creates indexes during the restore and that
> this contributes to the time required to complete the process.

18.000 tables? (amazed!)

If you use the -v switch on gbak you'll see what it is doing (restoring
records or building indexes or whatever. Not much details, though).

Which version og Fb (or IB)? Fb/1.5 is a lot quicker than previous
versions (in my experience). It also depends on indexes and h/w. I'm
restoring 1.5GB in about 3/4 of an hour (2x 3GHz XEONs and 15krpm
disks). I think Fb/1.0 needed 4+ hours (on <1GHz cpus)
What page size and no. of cache pages do you use?

> Also, while running the restore, I mistakenly connected to the
> database from IB Manager. I didn't open any tables or modify any
> data. I only made the connection to the db and then immediately
> closed the connection. Could doing so have corrupted the restore? If
> so, would it have said so via some error message immediately at the
> command line prompt where the gbak command was initialized? Nothing
> has changed at the command line prompt. The gbak command was not run
> with the verbose option enabled.

Is has been mentioned that this can be a cause of corruption. However,
I've tried this (on pre-Fb/1.5) and did not notice any negatives.
You'll have to test after the restore has finished...


You should look forward to Nbackup :-/


--
Aage J.