compress vs compression

[unknown]

Team,

Are there any reasons for using the compress:: method when doing a backup?

I know that 'with compression" can be used with archive databases, cross
server loads, and with remote backup servers.

I'm trying to see if there are any holes in the "with compression" method as
I try to convince my co-workers to switch methods.

[Jason L. Froebe [TeamSybase]]

Post by unknown
Team,
Are there any reasons for using the compress:: method when doing a backup?
I know that 'with compression" can be used with archive databases, cross
server loads, and with remote backup servers.
I'm trying to see if there are any holes in the "with compression"
method as I try to convince my co-workers to switch methods.

ask and ye shall receive :)
http://froebe.net/blog/2007/10/10/sybase-ase-backup-server-compressx-vs-with-compression-x-syntax/

let me know if you have any other questions that aren't covered on the
blog :)

[unknown]

Post by Jason L. Froebe [TeamSybase]
ask and ye shall receive :)

http://froebe.net/blog/2007/10/10/sybase-ase-backup-server-compressx-vs-with-compression-x-syntax/

Post by Jason L. Froebe [TeamSybase]
let me know if you have any other questions that aren't
covered on the blog :)

with compression = x -> "You need to understand that
whenever you dump a database to a file using this syntax,
there are three volumes that are dumped"

What does this mean?

three volumnes are not dumped with compress:: method?

what do you mean by volumes in this dump context?

[Jason L. Froebe [TeamSybase]]

On 15 Jul 2008 06:49:19 -0700,
in sybase.public.ase.backup+recovery

Post by Jason L. Froebe [TeamSybase]

Post by Jason L. Froebe [TeamSybase]
ask and ye shall receive :)

http://froebe.net/blog/2007/10/10/sybase-ase-backup-server-compressx-vs-with-co

mpression-x-syntax/

Post by Jason L. Froebe [TeamSybase]

Post by Jason L. Froebe [TeamSybase]
let me know if you have any other questions that aren't
covered on the blog :)

with compression = x -> "You need to understand that
whenever you dump a database to a file using this syntax,
there are three volumes that are dumped"
What does this mean?
three volumnes are not dumped with compress:: method?
what do you mean by volumes in this dump context?

The 'compress::' method will compress the entire data stream. You can actually
use the zlibrary (http://www.zlib.net) and uncompress the file.

The 'with compression' will create a file consisting of three parts (IOW:
volumes). The first two parts consist of meta-data that are relevant to the
dump file - these are NOT compressed. The third part is the data stream (your
database) which is compressed.

Both mechanisms use the zlibrary. There really isn't any performance difference
between the two. The "with compression" method does create a slightly larger
file (a few kilobytes) but that's so tiny to be insignificant.

I'm not sure if 'compress::' will be officially deprecated this year but it
should be soon.

Jason L. Froebe
TeamSybase
http://www.froebe.net/blog
http://www.froebe-fibers.com
http://www.isug.com

[unknown]

Post by Jason L. Froebe [TeamSybase]

Post by unknown
with compression = x -> "You need to understand that
whenever you dump a database to a file using this syntax,
there are three volumes that are dumped"
What does this mean?
three volumnes are not dumped with compress:: method?
what do you mean by volumes in this dump context?

The 'compress::' method will compress the entire data
stream. You can actually use the zlibrary
(http://www.zlib.net) and uncompress the file.
The 'with compression' will create a file consisting of
three parts (IOW: volumes). The first two parts consist
of meta-data that are relevant to the dump file - these
are NOT compressed. The third part is the data stream
(your database) which is compressed.

Thanks Jason, i confused the 3 volumes in your homepage post
for :
Dump phase number 1 completed
Dump phase number 2 completed
Dump phase number 3 completed
3 parts in one single file makes sense. Thanks it was very
helpful to know;

[A. M.]

Post by unknown
Are there any reasons for using the compress:: method when doing a backup?

No.

Post by unknown
I know that 'with compression" can be used with archive databases, cross
server loads, and with remote backup servers.
I'm trying to see if there are any holes in the "with compression" method as
I try to convince my co-workers to switch methods.

Better to ask them to justify using the archane and retarded
compress:: method. Ask them especially about retores and, of
course, archive databases.

-am © MMVIII

[Mikhail Teterin]

Post by A. M.
Better to ask them to justify using the archane and retarded
compress:: method.

It may be an /older/ method, but it is hardly "arcane"...

What's the justification for the term "retarded"? Thanks,

-mi

[Jason L. Froebe [TeamSybase]]

On Tue, 21 Oct 2008 12:19:08 -0400,
in sybase.public.ase.backup+recovery

Post by Mikhail Teterin

Post by A. M.
Better to ask them to justify using the archane and retarded
compress:: method.

It may be an /older/ method, but it is hardly "arcane"...
What's the justification for the term "retarded"? Thanks,
-mi

My guess is in reference to "compress::" dump files not being compatible with
the archive database feature in 12.5.4 and 15. Sybase presumably make it
compatible as both methods use the same compression (zlib) but... there is no
reason why they should.

--
Jason L. Froebe
Team Sybase
http://www.froebe.net/blog

No one has seen what you have seen, and until that happens, we're all going to
think that you're nuts. - Jack O'Neil, Stargate SG-1