@James, yes it would, what would follow would be normal recovery, same
as on a restart.
On 2 June 2011 09:49, James Green wrote:
> +1 for that.
>
> What would happen in a snapshot freeze then restore to the journal file at
> present? Would KahaDB roll back those transactions?
>
> James
>
> On 2 J
well not quite an atomic write, but as close as one can get with java
io. Batch writes are serialised and followed by an fsync, so the
fsfreeze will either block the next write or the next fsync. Either
way is fine from a consistency point of view. The index is
checkpointed to the journal periodica
+1 for that.
What would happen in a snapshot freeze then restore to the journal file at
present? Would KahaDB roll back those transactions?
James
On 2 June 2011 00:19, Steve Smith wrote:
>
> A user-space KahaDB snapshotting tool would certainly be useful regardless.
>
> Cheers,
> Steve
>
On 1 June 2011 19:50, Gary Tully wrote:
> yes, a restored backup would be recoverable.
>
> In creating a backup, there may be an issue with the lock file, or
> with an inuse journal file. The lock file is not important but you
> would want the latest journal files.
>
> Linux will allow you to free
yes, a restored backup would be recoverable.
In creating a backup, there may be an issue with the lock file, or
with an inuse journal file. The lock file is not important but you
would want the latest journal files.
Linux will allow you to freeze a filesystem, I guess other os's have
similar supp
