Copy Database Wizard Throughput?

Ok, so I'm trying to use the CDW to copy a SQL 2000 db to SQL 2005. The
original is composed of 2 or 3 data files and 1 translog file, total of about
12GB. I connected each server -- separate boxes -- to my internal network,
the SQL 2005 has a Gbit NIC, the 2000 server a 100MBit NIC. After 10+ hours,
the CDW is still processing and I can see that the largest of the ldf files
has copied over to the 2005 server, but basically I'm wondering, what's the
metric per GB of data to move, 1Gb/per hour? Has anyone else using the CDW
seen it work faster? Just seems a bit slow to me . . .
Thanks,
Chad
Hello,
I recommend you to do:-
1. Backup the SQL 2000 database
2. Copy the Backup file to SQL 2005 server
3. Restore the Backup file. This will automatically restore and upgrade the
database to SQL 2005
Thanks
Hari
"cc" <cc@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:21E0DBD4-D1C1-4539-85E9-E048EF0A4EDA@.microsoft.com...
> Ok, so I'm trying to use the CDW to copy a SQL 2000 db to SQL 2005. The
> original is composed of 2 or 3 data files and 1 translog file, total of
> about
> 12GB. I connected each server -- separate boxes -- to my internal
> network,
> the SQL 2005 has a Gbit NIC, the 2000 server a 100MBit NIC. After 10+
> hours,
> the CDW is still processing and I can see that the largest of the ldf
> files
> has copied over to the 2005 server, but basically I'm wondering, what's
> the
> metric per GB of data to move, 1Gb/per hour? Has anyone else using the
> CDW
> seen it work faster? Just seems a bit slow to me . . .
> Thanks,
>
> Chad
|||On Feb 19, 8:37 pm, cc <c...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> Ok, so I'm trying to use the CDW to copy a SQL 2000 db to SQL 2005. The
> original is composed of 2 or 3 data files and 1 translog file, total of about
> 12GB. I connected each server -- separate boxes -- to my internal network,
> the SQL 2005 has a Gbit NIC, the 2000 server a 100MBit NIC. After 10+ hours,
> the CDW is still processing and I can see that the largest of the ldf files
> has copied over to the 2005 server, but basically I'm wondering, what's the
> metric per GB of data to move, 1Gb/per hour? Has anyone else using the CDW
> seen it work faster? Just seems a bit slow to me . . .
> Thanks,
> Chad
That wizard does the equivalent of you scripting and creating each
individual database object, followed by a INSERT INTO/SELECT * for
each table. It's pretty much a toy with no real value. There are
better, accepted methods for transferring a database between servers:
1. BACKUP/RESTORE - preferred if downtime is a concern, can be done
without taking the host DB offline
2. Detach/reattach - preferred if a clean cutoff is required, host DB
is taken offline, copied to the new location, then brought back
online.
Both are much faster and simpler than the copy wizard.
|||It looks like I'll go the sp_detach route. I had tried CDW with some <100mb
dbs and it went smoothly and quickly, but this one actually croaked. Well,
to be specific, I thought maybe I had too many GUI resources open, and in
Win2003, the SQL Mgr and CDW both appear as separate graphical entities, so I
killed the SQL MGR, which took the CDW down, just like that, no warnings, no
rollback at all. Fortunately, I was able to reattach the mdf files on the
origin server. Sigh.
"Tracy McKibben" wrote:

> On Feb 19, 8:37 pm, cc <c...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>
> That wizard does the equivalent of you scripting and creating each
> individual database object, followed by a INSERT INTO/SELECT * for
> each table. It's pretty much a toy with no real value. There are
> better, accepted methods for transferring a database between servers:
> 1. BACKUP/RESTORE - preferred if downtime is a concern, can be done
> without taking the host DB offline
> 2. Detach/reattach - preferred if a clean cutoff is required, host DB
> is taken offline, copied to the new location, then brought back
> online.
> Both are much faster and simpler than the copy wizard.
>
>