-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 21
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Individual commands for local (snapshot
) and remote transfer (sync
)
#50
Comments
I understand your problem, but possible solutions don't integrate well into push / pull concept.
second solution would make most sense despite limitation. have you tried dedicated btrfs volume for mysql db, manually snapshot with appropriate locking and backup using separate job for that volume? |
I already made a dedicated btrfs db volume from the start, so this operation at least is async from the global fs backup jobs.
I'm not sure I comprehend the details of how to set this up in a sane way. Initial question (if I'm even reading things right): are we talking some sort of snapshot duplication scenario then (my manual snapshots + btrfs-sxbackup-strategy snapshots), or? Having trouble visualizing the outcome. |
you're right. |
snapshot
, could run
=== snapshot
+ transfer
?snapshot
) and remote transfer (sync
)
however, no time to implement this anytime soon. did you try replicate for backup? https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/8.0/en/replication-solutions-backups.html |
I am running a MySQL subvolume backup, and must lock the database for
run
command duration.Unfortunately, as database size increases,
run
is now taking 2 minutes and locked database is becoming increasingly uncomfortable to work with.It'd be a lot smoother, if I could lock the database only for proposed new
snapshot
command (estimated to be significantly faster to unlock from), andtransfer
separately afterwards. Your thoughts?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: