Subject | Re: [firebird-support] NBackup level 0 vs. file copy? |
---|---|
Author | Dmitry Kuzmenko |
Post date | 2013-10-08T10:55:44Z |
Hello, Kjell!
Tuesday, October 8, 2013, 2:37:57 PM, you wrote:
KR> Working with FB 2.5 on Windows 64 bit, how does Nbackup level 0 perform
KR> compared to a high-performance copy utility like FastCopy?
as I see on my desktop nbackup -b 0 is 2-3 times slower than
lock/file copy/unlock. I think this is known behavior.
KR> I'm asking because my DB is 80+ Gbyte and both the database and the
KR> backup are currently on the same physical disk.
this is BAD. Because of 2 concurrent operations - read and write.
If this is not raid 10, then read+write will be 2 times slower
than read from one physical disk and write to another physical disk.
This has nothing related to nbackup, it is just about copying any
file.
--
Dmitry Kuzmenko, www.ib-aid.com
Tuesday, October 8, 2013, 2:37:57 PM, you wrote:
KR> Working with FB 2.5 on Windows 64 bit, how does Nbackup level 0 perform
KR> compared to a high-performance copy utility like FastCopy?
as I see on my desktop nbackup -b 0 is 2-3 times slower than
lock/file copy/unlock. I think this is known behavior.
KR> I'm asking because my DB is 80+ Gbyte and both the database and the
KR> backup are currently on the same physical disk.
this is BAD. Because of 2 concurrent operations - read and write.
If this is not raid 10, then read+write will be 2 times slower
than read from one physical disk and write to another physical disk.
This has nothing related to nbackup, it is just about copying any
file.
--
Dmitry Kuzmenko, www.ib-aid.com