This is a discussion on Database backups growing exponentially within the SQL Server forums, part of the Microsoft SQL Server category; --> Hi All. I'm currently maintaining 4 servers - 1 for public/customers and 3 for backups, development, etc... I regularly ...
| |||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| ||||
| Hi All. I'm currently maintaining 4 servers - 1 for public/customers and 3 for backups, development, etc... I regularly backup the entire SQL database for our public server and restore it on each of the other servers. Lately, however, the database backups have grown (in size) incredibly fast - they've gone from about 200MB to 2+ GB in 2 months. (I wasn't entirely surprised by this at first since our client traffic has drastically increased as well.) The weird thing, though, is that (on two of the backup servers) when I restore the backup then use those servers to create a new complete backup, the new backup is only about 200-300 MB in size. My assumption is that there's some kind of setting buried deep inside the sql configuration allowing it to compress or otherwise alter backups. Does anyone have any ideas/thoughts as to what may be causing this issue? We're using SQL Server 7 on Windows 2000 servers. Thanks in advance. Gregg GArpin@nospam.plan3D.com |
| |||
| Hi You are probably appending multiple backups to the same device. The INIT keyword indicates the backup will overwrite existing backups the NOINIT keyword indicates that the backup will be appended. See Books online for more details. John <greggarpin@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1112031032.928818.223430@z14g2000cwz.googlegr oups.com... > Hi All. > > I'm currently maintaining 4 servers - 1 for public/customers and 3 > for backups, development, etc... > I regularly backup the entire SQL database for our public server and > restore it on each of the other servers. Lately, however, the database > backups have grown (in size) incredibly fast - they've gone from about > 200MB to 2+ GB in 2 months. (I wasn't entirely surprised by this at > first since our client traffic has drastically increased as well.) The > weird thing, though, is that (on two of the backup servers) when I > restore the backup then use those servers to create a new complete > backup, the new backup is only about 200-300 MB in size. > My assumption is that there's some kind of setting buried deep inside > the sql configuration allowing it to compress or otherwise alter > backups. Does anyone have any ideas/thoughts as to what may be causing > this issue? > We're using SQL Server 7 on Windows 2000 servers. > > Thanks in advance. > > Gregg > GArpin@nospam.plan3D.com > |
| ||||
| My thoughts too! Not sure if you're doing the backup via a batch process or the GUI. I'm going to describe the GUI interface, since that also includes a scheduler attribute that you may be using. At the bottom of the "SQLServer Backup" panel, there's a section called "Overwrite" -- set it to "Overwrite existing media" and perform a backup. Item to think about: it also sounds as though you're doing a complete backup of the database each time. If you wish to retain the historical sequence of records being added, changed and deleted; you'll need to select "differential backup" or "transaction log", depending upon your requirements. The decision as to which method of backups to use depends upon the volatility of the data and how important the historical "log" is versus snap-shots. Have you also thought of replication to shift the data between the servers? You are obviously doing a one-way star arrangement (central master and remote copies, no changes coming back) and replication is a perfect solution to your needs. |