Click here to monitor SSC
SQLServerCentral is supported by Red Gate Software Ltd.
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 


 
     
Recent Posts
   
Popular Topics
Home   
Search
    Members    Calendar    Who's On

Home » SQL Server 2008 » SQL Server 2008 - General » Litespeed Vs Native Backup?
Add to briefcase
12 posts, Page 1 of 2
12»»

Litespeed Vs Native Backup? Expand / Collapse
Rate Topic
Display Mode
Topic Options
Author
Message
luckysql.kinda
Posted Thursday, January 06, 2011 8:51 PM
Old Hand

Old HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld Hand

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 11:19 AM
Points: 309, Visits: 645
We have upto 1TB DBs in our environment and total size of all the backups reach upto 48TB. Any heads up whether Litespeed is still better than Native with compression?

-Lucky
Post #1044114
crazy4sql
Posted Thursday, January 06, 2011 8:55 PM


SSC Eights!

SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, May 16, 2013 8:10 PM
Points: 876, Visits: 3,731
both have the different compression algorithm. And I personally prefer litespeed.

----------
Ashish
Post #1044115
MichaelJasson
Posted Thursday, January 06, 2011 9:24 PM


SSC Journeyman

SSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC Journeyman

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, June 03, 2011 4:58 PM
Points: 88, Visits: 191
Comparison between Litespeed Backup and Native Backup Compression

-Michael

-MJ
Please do not print mails and docx unless it is absolutely necessary. Spread environmental awareness.
Post #1044120
luckysql.kinda
Posted Thursday, January 06, 2011 10:49 PM
Old Hand

Old HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld Hand

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 11:19 AM
Points: 309, Visits: 645
Thanks for the post, Michael.

-lucky
Post #1044144
anuraganu.tiwari
Posted Friday, January 07, 2011 12:01 PM
Forum Newbie

Forum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum Newbie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, January 14, 2011 3:04 PM
Points: 6, Visits: 11
Thanks Michaeljasson
Post #1044612
Satish-219904
Posted Friday, January 07, 2011 12:50 PM
SSC Rookie

SSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC Rookie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, May 07, 2013 8:13 AM
Points: 30, Visits: 134
I prefer LiteSpeed over SQL native compression. I have been using this for couple of my projects. LiteSpeed provides various compressions levels to use. I went with default which is 1. It saves little over 80% in terms of disk space. LiteSpeed also has integrated Log Shipping in case if you need and also lot of other features. Good Luck.

Thanks,
Satish
Post #1044653
Elliott Whitlow
Posted Friday, January 07, 2011 3:31 PM


SSCertifiable

SSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiable

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 12:02 PM
Points: 5,854, Visits: 4,873
Interesting reading.. But at ~$1500/server I don't think I could stomache it for any but the most obscenely large database servers.

The smaller backup files than native with compression is nice but only a partial justification for purchase.

For SQL 2005 I would be a bit more open, but the price is still a deterent..

CEWII
Post #1044760
JeremyE
Posted Friday, January 07, 2011 4:20 PM
SSCrazy

SSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 2:15 PM
Points: 2,390, Visits: 2,658
A big win for Litespeed is the ability to do object level restores. Restoring a single table or proc is much easier than restoring an entire TB sized database and extracting the single table.
Post #1044785
Elliott Whitlow
Posted Friday, January 07, 2011 4:30 PM


SSCertifiable

SSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiable

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 12:02 PM
Points: 5,854, Visits: 4,873
JeremyE (1/7/2011)
A big win for Litespeed is the ability to do object level restores. Restoring a single table or proc is much easier than restoring an entire TB sized database and extracting the single table.
As far as single table, I'll give you that.. Out hosts Red-Gate has a tool that lets you mount the backup like a database and access it directly, very cool..

As far a sproc restore, I'm taking the position that if you have to go to the backup to get source code, that code control is likely an issue in your organization. The database is a recipient of the code not a storage location.. Sorry..

CEWII
Post #1044789
JeremyE
Posted Friday, January 07, 2011 4:39 PM
SSCrazy

SSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 2:15 PM
Points: 2,390, Visits: 2,658
Elliott Whitlow (1/7/2011)
[quote]
As far a sproc restore, I'm taking the position that if you have to go to the backup to get source code, that code control is likely an issue in your organization. The database is a recipient of the code not a storage location.. Sorry..

CEWII


No reason to be sorry. I was merely highlighting the feature set and differences between Litepseed backups and compressed native SQL backups.

If you don't need object level restore, variable compression, or want to pay $1500/server then compressed native SQL backups will work just as well.
Post #1044792
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase
12 posts, Page 1 of 2
12»»

Permissions Expand / Collapse

 
 
Copyright © 2002-2013 Simple Talk Publishing. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use. Report Abuse.