LinkedIn | FaceBook | Twitter
There's been some chatter on a few of the newsgroups I subscribe to about backup compression in SQL Server 2008. It seems that some folks are noticing that restoring from a compressed backup actually restores faster than an uncompressed one. This might not make any sense on the surface - after all, the system has to run all kinds of calculations to decompress the data as it is restored, so since that involves more work, shouldn't it take more time? Well, it might if your CPU is busy, but as it turns out it usually isn't. Paul Randal did some tests on this some time back and posted the results on his blog. You should take similar measurements as part of your restore strategy to determine how quickly you can get your enterprise up and running.
Makes perfect sense - we all have a lot more free CPU time available than disks idle. You see the same things on Litespeed - heck, that's been one of their selling points for a while - less space _and_ runs faster.