> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Reindl Harald" <h.reindl@stripped>
>
> Am 17.10.2012 12:26, schrieb Johan De Meersman:
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Reindl Harald" <h.reindl@stripped>
> >>
> >> i do not trust any FS snapshot in this context
>
> > Why? I am completely unaware of any functional difference between an rsync and a
> snapshot, everything else being equal.
>
> because you have to be pretty sure that you snapshot is consistent
> rsync the snapshot may result in the problem of the OP if there
> was not all written back to disk before the snapshot was made
>
> the point of rsync in the way i make it is that mysqld is DOWN
> and it is only down for a very small timeframe because
> two rsync-runs, the first while mysqld is up and the
> second one after stop mysqld has only to copy diff
I agree with the double rsync - I use the same technique - but again, if your daemon is
down (thus, everything else being equal) a snapshot is just as consistent as an rsync,
no?
The main benefit of a snapshot, as far as I see, is that you don't have to do the I/O
intensive first rsync - at the cost of copy-on-write operations after the fact, of
course. Copy-on-write is blocklevel, though, so also has fairly little impact on
performance save for extra metadata updates.
--
Linux Bier Wanderung 2012, now also available in Belgium!
August, 12 to 19, Diksmuide, Belgium - http://lbw2012.tuxera.be
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/
iEYEARECAAYFAlB+incACgkQhmBjz394AnmDuACfdjg0rkEObc4pVBLXoyQ/yjfJ
/KIAni98ICX5PTwrPs4RkvLC2fH+EHnZ
=772b
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
