Well, the biggest problem we have to answer for the clients is the following:
1. Backup method that doesn't take long and don't impact system
2. Restore needs to be done on a quick as possible way in order to minimize downtime.
The one client is running master - master replication with master server in usa, and slave in south africa. They need master backup to be done in the states.
Sent via my BlackBerry from Vodacom - let your email find you!
From: Reindl Harald <h.reindl@stripped>
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2012 16:49:45
Subject: Re: Mysql backup for large databases
i would call snapshots on a running system much more dumb
than "innodb_flush_log_at_trx_commit = 2" on systems with
100% stable power instead waste IOPS on shared storages
Am 01.11.2012 16:45, schrieb Singer Wang:
> Assuming you're not doing dumb stuff like innodb_flush_log_at_tx=0 or 2 and etc, you should be fine. We have been
> using the trio: flush tables with read lock, xfs_freeze, snapshot for months now without any issues. And we test
> the backups (we load the backup into a staging once a day, and dev once a week)
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl@stripped <mailto:h.reindl@stripped>> wrote:
> > Why do you need downtime?
> because mysqld has many buffers in memory and there
> is no atomic "flush buffers in daemon and freeze backend FS"
> short ago there was a guy on this list which had to realize
> this the hard way with a corrupt slave taken from a snapshot
> that's why i would ALWAYS do master/slave what means ONE time
> down (rsync; stop master; rsync; start master) for a small
> timewindow and after that you can stop the slave, take a
> 100% consistent backup of it's whole datadir and start
> the slave again which will do all transactions from the
> binarylog happened in the meantime