October 30, 2018 at 10:42 am
Regardless of what you use to copy the files, your biggest limiting factors are going to the speed of the WAN connection at both ends and the various and sundry pieces of equipment between your endpoints (the ISP routers, etc)
If you've got a slow upload on your end, or a slow download on the remote end, that's going to set the top end of your file transfer.
October 30, 2018 at 10:55 am
The only thing I can think of may be to backup across multiple files, and copy them in parallel.
We created a separate backup network. Each server has multiple NIC's, one of them is dedicated to backups.
Michael L John
If you assassinate a DBA, would you pull a trigger?
To properly post on a forum:
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/61537/
October 30, 2018 at 11:09 am
Depending on the data, you might get some benefit from using a WAN compression device, but they're not cheap. And I guess you haven't got one of those to hand, or you would be using it already. Or maybe you are, and you just don't know about it...
Apart from that, though, what everyone else has said.
The best way to speed up a copy is to copy the least amount of data possible. And not do, as an erstwhile colleague of mine did, run from a server at our end a ZIP routine to compress a file at the client's site prior to copying it over to our site. He hadn't twigged that he was reading the data over the line, compressing it, sending it back up the line to write it to the ZIP file on the client's server, only to have to copy the file again... that was a slow afternoon.
Thomas Rushton
blog: https://thelonedba.wordpress.com
October 30, 2018 at 7:59 pm
dajonx - Tuesday, October 30, 2018 9:28 AMHi,I am trying to Robocopy large .bak files over the WAN and it's going terribly slow. The full backup files are about 8 TB (with SQL compression).
Does anyone have any recommendations with any super fast file copying programs?
Thank you.
What happened with the WAN appliances you installed back in 2011?
--Jeff Moden
October 31, 2018 at 7:12 am
Thank you for all of the responses!
We do have Riverbed CX5070 appliances at both sites. I'm wondering if the SQL compression is [in a way] making it more difficult for the Riverbeds to optimize it? Is it SMB2 or SMB3? The servers are Windows Server 2016 Core with SQL Server 2016. Do you guys think I should open a support case with Riverbed to try to optimize the file transfers?
Jeff: You certainly have great memory!
October 31, 2018 at 7:50 am
dajonx - Wednesday, October 31, 2018 7:12 AMThank you for all of the responses!We do have Riverbed CX5070 appliances at both sites. I'm wondering if the SQL compression is [in a way] making it more difficult for the Riverbeds to optimize it? Is it SMB2 or SMB3? The servers are Windows Server 2016 Core with SQL Server 2016. Do you guys think I should open a support case with Riverbed to try to optimize the file transfers?
Jeff: You certainly have great memory!
I wish I could claim it was my memory but it's not that. I looked at your blog link. It also says in that blog that you can't use compression when you use the appliance but I don't know about that. I've successfully used compression in a lot of places where they suggest otherwise.
--Jeff Moden
November 4, 2018 at 4:58 pm
dajonx - Friday, November 2, 2018 7:31 AMOhh, my attempted blog. Haha!Do you happen to have Riverbed appliances? I noticed that SMB2/SMB3 are not enabled. Do you think that would help?
Apologies for the late reply. To be honest, I don't know what we use. Our Network/Operations group takes care of that for us.
--Jeff Moden
Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply