From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: anthony mayes Subject: Re: raid0 + raid1 question Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2003 16:00:11 -0500 Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <3F85CC5B.5020107@siue.edu> References: <3F84793F.6060400@siue.edu> <1065729282.10027.127.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1065729282.10027.127.camel@localhost.localdomain> To: "Rechenberg, Andrew" Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids Rechenberg, Andrew wrote: >We actually used to backup our data in this fashion, but we used a >triple mirror. We had three hardware RAID arrays and then we used Linux >software RAID to mirror those three (i.e. /dev/hdc1, /dev/hdd1, and >/dev/hde1). At night we used mdadm to break the mirror, mount the >removed partition and backup, and then add the partition back in and >re-mirror. > Exactly what we do now. >The database is unavailable for less than 1 minute while the snapshot is >taken (it actually takes less than 10 seconds to snapshot ~360GB, the >other time is just the script sleeping, making sure all transactions >complete). This solution ensures a consistent database, while also >having near-line backups available on disk. > I'm assuming the snapshot it the same size as the FS to backup. What if you don't have enough disk space to do this? -- Anthony Mayes UNIX Server Administration Southern Illinois University Edwardsville anmayes@siue.edu