Subject RE: [firebird-support] Backup much faster than restore
Author Maya Opperman
>> Got an interesting question from one of my customers:
>> "The backup runs in 1 secs and 2 secs for zipping the file but the
> >restore takes 1min 32secs. Why is there such a difference in the time?"
> >Well, restoring obviously has to do a lot more work, as it has to
> >rebuild indices, and database structures, but it does seem like quite
> >a huge difference. Does that really explain the difference in speed?
> >(If need be, I can confirm the exact Firebird version, but I am
> >assuming it is Firebird 2.5, since they have just installed.) Thanks
>> Maya

>I believe that the integrity checks which are computationally more expensive are done on the restore rather than backup.

>This reduces the load on the server since backups are often done during operating activities and we don't want to impinge on operations.
> A restore would typically take the system offline unless it is a test restore.

Thanks Peter

I just thought of something else. He's probably using the non-verbose backup option, and our restore option, we haven't given the end user the option of removing verbose. That definitely makes a difference too.


Ps. was McLeod too before I got married, haha