SM for SQL v/s SQL native backup/restore

  • Has anyone used netapp's SM for SQL for backup and recovery. I wanted to know how good is it compared to SQL native backup/restore.

  • any luck :crying:

  • Ananda-292708 (4/19/2010)


    any luck :crying:

    Sorry - we take native backup them let NetBackup to move files to tape. Works like a charm.

    _____________________________________
    Pablo (Paul) Berzukov

    Author of Understanding Database Administration available at Amazon and other bookstores.

    Disclaimer: Advice is provided to the best of my knowledge but no implicit or explicit warranties are provided. Since the advisor explicitly encourages testing any and all suggestions on a test non-production environment advisor should not held liable or responsible for any actions taken based on the given advice.
  • I haven't used NetApp's solution specifically (EMC have tried to sell us their equivalent) but you need to be clear that you're not comparing like for like.

    NetApp's solution is heavily tied to their own SAN hardware and utilises storage level snapshots in order to backup the database, which has the potential to be highly fast and flexible for VLDB's but you are fundamentally tied into the integrity of the SAN and you don't have a backup that you can take/use anywhere - It's difficult to get the technical details for this product on their site, but I'm guessing you couldn't take one of their backups and restore it to a server on a different brand of SAN/local disks

    If you have multi-TB databases, then the backup/restore time may make this an attractive option, but I'd always keep regular native/3rd party compressed backups along side the NetApp ones

  • that was good information. I was not aware the the snap cannot be restored on another system.

    Since this is quiet fast I guess than we can use this of DR to another site.

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply