On Tue, March 22, 2011 10:32, Karen Abgarian wrote: > Why, if they shut down the slave, it will be quite consistent. Only that > this technique is not as much of the 21th century, but is like 30 years > old. > Placing locks is about the same as shutting it down. > Ah, but if you have the dump function do the locking it will also remember to "restart" it when its done.
> On Mar 22, 2011, at 6:01 AM, Johan De Meersman wrote: > >> >> You are assuming that the database is one table of 5.000 gigabyte, and >> not 5.000 tables of one gigabyte; and that the backup needs to be >> consistent :-p >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Reindl Harald" <h.rei...@thelounge.net> >>> To: mysql@lists.mysql.com >>> Sent: Monday, 21 March, 2011 12:44:08 PM >>> Subject: Re: Question about Backup >>> >>> Forget mysqldump because TABLE LOCKS for so hughe databases >>> I would setup a replication-slave because you can stop >>> the salave and make a filesystem-backup of the whole db-folder >>> while the production server is online, we do this with our >>> dbmail-server since 2009 >>> >> >> -- >> Bier met grenadyn >> Is als mosterd by den wyn >> Sy die't drinkt, is eene kwezel >> Hy die't drinkt, is ras een ezel >> >> -- >> MySQL General Mailing List >> For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql >> To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=a...@apple.com >> > > > -- > MySQL General Mailing List > For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql > To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=mussa...@csz.com > > -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
