RE: [firebird-support] NBackup level 0 vs. file copy?

2013-10-08 Thread Leyne, Sean
Dmitry, > Tuesday, October 8, 2013, 2:37:57 PM, you wrote: > > KR> Working with FB 2.5 on Windows 64 bit, how does Nbackup level 0 > KR> perform compared to a high-performance copy utility like FastCopy? > > as I see on my desktop nbackup -b 0 is 2-3 times slower than lock/file > copy/unlock. I

Re: [firebird-support] NBackup level 0 vs. file copy?

2013-10-08 Thread Konstantin Khomoutov
On Tue, 8 Oct 2013 12:37:57 +0200 Kjell Rilbe wrote: > Working with FB 2.5 on Windows 64 bit, how does Nbackup level 0 > perform compared to a high-performance copy utility like FastCopy? > > I'm asking because my DB is 80+ Gbyte and both the database and the > backup are currently on the same

Re: [firebird-support] NBackup level 0 vs. file copy?

2013-10-08 Thread Kjell Rilbe
Dmitry Kuzmenko skriver: > > Hello, Kjell! > > Tuesday, October 8, 2013, 2:37:57 PM, you wrote: > > KR> Working with FB 2.5 on Windows 64 bit, how does Nbackup level 0 > perform > KR> compared to a high-performance copy utility like FastCopy? > > as I see on my desktop nbackup -b 0 is 2-3 times sl

Re: [firebird-support] NBackup level 0 vs. file copy?

2013-10-08 Thread Dmitry Kuzmenko
Hello, Kjell! Tuesday, October 8, 2013, 2:37:57 PM, you wrote: KR> Working with FB 2.5 on Windows 64 bit, how does Nbackup level 0 perform KR> compared to a high-performance copy utility like FastCopy? as I see on my desktop nbackup -b 0 is 2-3 times slower than lock/file copy/unlock. I think th

[firebird-support] NBackup level 0 vs. file copy?

2013-10-08 Thread Kjell Rilbe
Working with FB 2.5 on Windows 64 bit, how does Nbackup level 0 perform compared to a high-performance copy utility like FastCopy? I'm asking because my DB is 80+ Gbyte and both the database and the backup are currently on the same physical disk. FastCopy works with large chunks to minimize tim