Hello.
Among other suggestions think about such way. If you MyISAM and InnoDB tables are used by different applications or consistent state between them doesn't play big value, and the size of MyISAM tables is low enough, you could perform the dump in two steps listing the tables of the same type in command line: mysqldump --options_for_innodb database list_of_innodb_tables mysqldump --options_for_MyISAM database list_of_MyISAM tables As the size of MyISAM tables is not large the dump would be quick and tables would be locked for a short period of time. Scott Plumlee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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. > -- For technical support contracts, goto https://order.mysql.com/?ref=ensita This email is sponsored by Ensita.NET http://www.ensita.net/ __ ___ ___ ____ __ / |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ / Gleb Paharenko / /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ [EMAIL PROTECTED] /_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ MySQL AB / Ensita.NET <___/ www.mysql.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
