Hi All
We want to use rsync to backup a live Berkley db to a remote site. BDB
has a requirement that read has to be in the unit of db page size. So
wonder how could we make sure that rsync can follow that? If we need
to change the code, where we should begin to look at? Thanks!
Ming
--
Please us
On 22.05.2009 16:25, Ming Zhang wrote:
> Hi All
>
> We want to use rsync to backup a live Berkley db to a remote site. BDB
> has a requirement that read has to be in the unit of db page size. So
> wonder how could we make sure that rsync can follow that? If we need
> to change the code, where we s
it become a BDD question now.. ;)
On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote:
> On 22.05.2009 16:25, Ming Zhang wrote:
>> Hi All
>>
>> We want to use rsync to backup a live Berkley db to a remote site. BDB
>> has a requirement that read has to be in the unit of db page size. S
On 22.05.2009 20:30, Ming Zhang wrote:
> it become a BDD question now.. ;)
>
> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote:
> > On 22.05.2009 16:25, Ming Zhang wrote:
> >> Hi All
> >>
> >> We want to use rsync to backup a live Berkley db to a remote site. BDB
> >> has a require
>
> No. The block size is NEVER relevant for a copy via rsync, bits are bits
> regardless of you copying them bit by bit or in larger groups.
>
please have a read
http://www.oracle.com/technology/documentation/berkeley-db/db/ref/transapp/archival.html
see the db page size issue when copy a online
On 23.05.2009 08:44, Ming Zhang wrote:
> >
> > No. The block size is NEVER relevant for a copy via rsync, bits are bits
> > regardless of you copying them bit by bit or in larger groups.
> >
>
> please have a read
> http://www.oracle.com/technology/documentation/berkeley-db/db/ref/transapp/archiva
On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 10:25 AM, Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote:
> On 23.05.2009 08:44, Ming Zhang wrote:
>> >
>> > No. The block size is NEVER relevant for a copy via rsync, bits are bits
>> > regardless of you copying them bit by bit or in larger groups.
>> >
>>
>> please have a read
>> http://w
On 23.05.2009 17:32, Ming Zhang wrote:
> On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 10:25 AM, Matthias Schniedermeyer
> wrote:
> > On 23.05.2009 08:44, Ming Zhang wrote:
> >> >
> >> > No. The block size is NEVER relevant for a copy via rsync, bits are bits
> >> > regardless of you copying them bit by bit or in larg
On Sun, 24 May 2009 00:45:09 +0200, Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote:
> On the other hand the quiescent and device/filesystem snapshotting
> results in a rsyncable copy.
Another possibility is to have the files on a volume or file system that
supports snapshots. That won't guarantee "quiescent", b
On 26.05.2009 02:17, Andrew Gideon wrote:
> On Sun, 24 May 2009 00:45:09 +0200, Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote:
>
> > On the other hand the quiescent and device/filesystem snapshotting
> > results in a rsyncable copy.
>
> Another possibility is to have the files on a volume or file system that
>
On Tue, 26 May 2009 11:02:53 +0200, Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote:
> The important thing is that all
> the data is from the same point in time.
That's what I was thinking, and there are numerous tools which support
this at the file system/volume level.
One consideration, though, is that snapsho
11 matches
Mail list logo
