If you are runing binary log and do a FLUSH LOGS mysqldump --opt --skip-lock-tables MyISAM table names FLUSH LOGS mysqldump --opt --single-transaction INNODB table names
You have a recoverable state with the combination of the mysqldump file and the binary log file that was started by the 1st FLUSH LOGS command. The recovered database wil be restored to the date time that the 2nd FLUSH LOGS command was issued instead of the start time of the backup, but you won't have to lock all of your tables and it wil give you a consistent state across a mixed INNODB MyISAM environment. The downside is -you have 3 files to deal with -you have to maintain the table names in the mysqldump commands -you have a small risk of a change ocurring in the MyISAM tables between time the 2nd FLUSH LOGS is executed and the 2nd mysqldump command is executed -----Original Message----- From: Scott Plumlee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 17, 2005 10:21 AM To: mysql@lists.mysql.com Subject: Backup database with MyISAM and InnoDB tables together I'm not clear on best practice to use on a database containing both MyISAM and InnoDB tables. For the MyISAM tables, it seems better to use mysqldump --opt, thus getting the --lock-tables option, but for the InnoDB the --single-transaction is preferred. Since they are mutually exclusive, is there a best practice to get consistent state of the tables when the database dump is performed? Would `mysqldump --opt --skip-lock-tables --single-transaction` be best for a database that is mostly InnoDB tables, but does have a few MyISAM tables? WOuld I be better off locking the database from any updates/inserts, and specifying particular commands for individual tables? Any advice appreciated, including RTFMs with links. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]