Watch, Follow, &
Connect with Us

For forums, blogs and more please visit our
Developer Tools Community.


Welcome, Guest
Guest Settings
Help

Thread: Interbase Backup Restore speeds


This question is not answered. Helpful answers available: 2. Correct answers available: 1.


Permlink Replies: 2 - Last Post: Jun 20, 2014 8:31 AM Last Post By: quinn wildman
Darryl Elwin

Posts: 1
Registered: 7/19/14
Interbase Backup Restore speeds  
Click to report abuse...   Click to reply to this thread Reply
  Posted: Jun 19, 2014 5:01 PM
Hi All.
I have a server with the following Spec
HP DL380 G6, 1 x 2.26 Quad core CPU hyper threading ON, 32GB Memory.
Server runs 2 array controllers, one has raid 5 array for OS, other has raid 10 Array for Interbase/Client database application
Application using DB is Medtech (http://www.medtechglobal.com/nz/products-nz/medtech32-nz/)

OS is Windows 2008 R2 Standard SP1
Interbase XE 64 installed, version WI-V10.0.4.590

Application runs 2 DB's one called MT32, the other called BLOB.
The MT32 DB contains all the client data, Name, address, visits, payments etc, the BLOB DB contains the clients scanned documents.
Currently the MT32 is 42GB and the BLOB is 72GB.

When doing an Interbase backup and restore, the BLOB takes 50mins to backup and 45 to restore but the MT32 takes 65mins to backup and 3.5hours to restore.
Both DB's are stored in the same location.
Monitoring disc, memory and CPU while the restore is happening shows the server under no load.

This leads me to think it is something about the backup restore process itself.

If anyone can point me in the right direction to any resources on how to improve this speed issue and general best performance practices for Interbase XE, I'd be gratefull.

Cheers
Jeff Overcash (...

Posts: 1,529
Registered: 9/23/99
Re: Interbase Backup Restore speeds  
Click to report abuse...   Click to reply to this thread Reply
  Posted: Jun 19, 2014 6:12 PM   in response to: Darryl Elwin in response to: Darryl Elwin
Darryl Elwin wrote:
Hi All.
I have a server with the following Spec
HP DL380 G6, 1 x 2.26 Quad core CPU hyper threading ON, 32GB Memory.
Server runs 2 array controllers, one has raid 5 array for OS, other has raid 10 Array for Interbase/Client database application
Application using DB is Medtech (http://www.medtechglobal.com/nz/products-nz/medtech32-nz/)

OS is Windows 2008 R2 Standard SP1
Interbase XE 64 installed, version WI-V10.0.4.590

Application runs 2 DB's one called MT32, the other called BLOB.
The MT32 DB contains all the client data, Name, address, visits, payments etc, the BLOB DB contains the clients scanned documents.
Currently the MT32 is 42GB and the BLOB is 72GB.

When doing an Interbase backup and restore, the BLOB takes 50mins to backup and 45 to restore but the MT32 takes 65mins to backup and 3.5hours to restore.
Both DB's are stored in the same location.
Monitoring disc, memory and CPU while the restore is happening shows the server under no load.

This leads me to think it is something about the backup restore process itself.

If anyone can point me in the right direction to any resources on how to improve this speed issue and general best performance practices for Interbase XE, I'd be gratefull.

Cheers

XE restores indexes serially so I would suspect that you have a lot more indexes
on your data database than your blob one. Try restoring each with indexes off
and compare speeds without indexes, if they are in line with each other that is
it. Also if you are using gbak, use the -se switch for better speed.

XE3 now restores indexes in parallel IIRC.

--
Jeff Overcash (TeamB)
(Please do not email me directly unless asked. Thank You)
And so I patrol in the valley of the shadow of the tricolor
I must fear evil. For I am but mortal and mortals can only die.
Asking questions, pleading answers from the nameless
faceless watchers that stalk the carpeted corridors of Whitehall.
(Fish)
quinn wildman

Posts: 856
Registered: 12/2/99
Re: Interbase Backup Restore speeds  
Click to report abuse...   Click to reply to this thread Reply
  Posted: Jun 20, 2014 8:31 AM   in response to: Jeff Overcash (... in response to: Jeff Overcash (...
Jeff Overcash (TeamB) wrote:
XE3 now restores indexes in parallel IIRC.

This can be expanded on a bit. This is controlled by the max_assistants
setting in ibconfig. It defaults to 1, which means at max 2 indexes will
be being created in parallel. Given your hardware, max_assistants of 3
is likely to be optimal. However, you will have to test to be sure.

Note that you are doing complete physical backups here. A much more
efficient way is to use the journaling system and do incremental backups
instead.
Legend
Helpful Answer (5 pts)
Correct Answer (10 pts)

Server Response from: ETNAJIVE02