> ----- 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/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----