Re: LVM-snapshot + mysqldump -- is this a reasonable backup

2005-10-03 Thread George Herson
> > Jim, > > > > I didn't word my question quite right because I was only guessing at > > what a LVM snapshot was. Moreover, what you're saying is all correct. > > However, I was not suggesting that the snapshot be kept around once the > > backup is made. > > > > Let's go to article "What is a

Re: LVM-snapshot + mysqldump -- is this a reasonable backup

2005-09-29 Thread William R. Mussatto
George Herson said: > James G. Sack (jim) wrote: > >>On Mon, 2005-09-19 at 13:14 -0400, George Herson wrote: >> >> >>>James G. Sack (jim) wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Mon, 2005-09-19 at 12:15 -0400, George Herson wrote: >Dear Jim, > >Re: your post at http://lists.mysql.

Re: LVM-snapshot + mysqldump -- is this a reasonable backup

2005-09-29 Thread George Herson
James G. Sack (jim) wrote: On Mon, 2005-09-19 at 13:14 -0400, George Herson wrote: James G. Sack (jim) wrote: On Mon, 2005-09-19 at 12:15 -0400, George Herson wrote: Dear Jim, Re: your post at http://lists.mysql.com/mysql/189058, why bothe

Re: LVM-snapshot + mysqldump -- is this a reasonable backup

2005-09-19 Thread James G. Sack (jim)
On Mon, 2005-09-19 at 13:14 -0400, George Herson wrote: > James G. Sack (jim) wrote: > > >On Mon, 2005-09-19 at 12:15 -0400, George Herson wrote: > > > > > >>Dear Jim, > >> > >>Re: your post at http://lists.mysql.com/mysql/189058, why bother > >>creating the mysqldump if you already have the sn

Re: LVM-snapshot + mysqldump -- is this a reasonable backup

2005-09-19 Thread George Herson
James G. Sack (jim) wrote: On Mon, 2005-09-19 at 12:15 -0400, George Herson wrote: Dear Jim, Re: your post at http://lists.mysql.com/mysql/189058, why bother creating the mysqldump if you already have the snapshot? Why not just backup the snapshot? [...] The output of mysqldump *i

RE: LVM-snapshot + mysqldump -- is this a reasonable backup

2005-09-19 Thread James G. Sack (jim)
On Mon, 2005-09-19 at 12:15 -0400, George Herson wrote: > Dear Jim, > > Re: your post at http://lists.mysql.com/mysql/189058, why bother > creating the mysqldump if you already have the snapshot? Why not just > backup the snapshot? > > (I'd have hit reply online but didn't see a Reply button a

RE: LVM-snapshot + mysqldump -- is this a reasonable backup strategy?

2005-09-13 Thread James G. Sack (jim)
quoting Alan Williamson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> .. >> This recipe is intended to minimize the impact on ongoing database >> operations by inhibiting writes only during a relatively speedy >> operation (creating a snapshot). The long dump operation can ... > >This seems to be a rather long winded way o

RE: LVM-snapshot + mysqldump -- is this a reasonable backup strategy?

2005-09-12 Thread Alan Williamson
> This recipe is intended to minimize the impact on ongoing database > operations by inhibiting writes only during a relatively speedy > operation (creating a snapshot). The long dump operation can ... This seems to be a rather long winded way of doing this. Why not replicate the database and th

Re: LVM-snapshot + mysqldump -- is this a reasonable backup strategy?

2005-09-08 Thread Gleb Paharenko
Hello. A few months ago you've been writing about issues with InnoDB when using a similar recipe. Please, share your experience of how you've solved that problems. "James G. Sack (jim)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This recipe is intended to minimize the impact on ongoing database > ope

LVM-snapshot + mysqldump -- is this a reasonable backup strategy?

2005-09-08 Thread James G. Sack (jim)
This recipe is intended to minimize the impact on ongoing database operations by inhibiting writes only during a relatively speedy operation (creating a snapshot). The long dump operation can then be performed on the (stable) snapshot, without interfering with ongoing use of the live database. 1.