From: "Janos Toth F." <toth.f.janos@gmail.com>
To: Chris Murphy <lists@colorremedies.com>
Cc: siranee.ja@tpc.co.th, Btrfs BTRFS <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>,
voravat@tpcorp.co.th
Subject: Re: btrfs issue with mariadb incremental backup
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2017 00:41:06 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CANznX5HUCXZFFUXGdD23cE59tP1LM2SDEXwdsjG13Jh+OeaZYQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJCQCtRqkigHcGLorR3EN5TbGSRCJG3YkdGE_BG80SBXFes7vA@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 11:34 PM, Chris Murphy <lists@colorremedies.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 11:08 PM, <siranee.ja@tpc.co.th> wrote:
>
> I think the problem is that the script does things so fast that the
> snapshot is not always consistent on disk before btrfs send starts.
> It's just a guess though. If I'm right, this means the rsync mismaches
> mean the destination snapshots are bad.
Hmm. I was wondering about this exact issue the other day when I
fiddled with my own backup script.
- Should I issue a sync between creating a snapshot and starting to
rsync (or send/receive) the content of that fresh snapshot to an
external backup storage?
I dismissed the thought because I figured rsync should see the proper
state regardless if some data is still waiting in the system
write-back cache.
Now I am confused again. Is it only for send/receive? (I don't use
that feature yet but thought about switching to it from rsync.)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-12 22:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-09 4:32 btrfs issue with mariadb incremental backup siranee.ja
2017-08-09 5:46 ` Chris Murphy
2017-08-09 6:36 ` siranee.ja
2017-08-09 17:59 ` Chris Murphy
2017-08-10 2:03 ` siranee.ja
2017-08-11 4:40 ` siranee.ja
2017-08-11 6:00 ` siranee.ja
2017-08-11 15:35 ` Chris Murphy
2017-08-12 2:38 ` siranee.ja
2017-08-12 4:31 ` Chris Murphy
2017-08-12 5:08 ` siranee.ja
2017-08-12 21:34 ` Chris Murphy
2017-08-12 22:41 ` Janos Toth F. [this message]
2017-08-12 23:07 ` Chris Murphy
2017-08-12 22:49 ` Hugo Mills
2017-08-12 23:14 ` Chris Murphy
2017-08-13 2:20 ` siranee.ja
2017-08-13 2:59 ` Chris Murphy
2017-08-13 3:40 ` siranee.ja
2017-08-13 4:34 ` Chris Murphy
2017-08-13 10:49 ` siranee.ja
2017-08-13 19:31 ` Chris Murphy
2017-08-13 6:20 ` A L
2017-08-13 10:52 ` siranee.ja
2017-08-13 12:51 ` A L
2017-08-13 14:00 ` siranee.ja
2017-08-13 21:31 ` A L
2017-08-14 1:57 ` siranee.ja
2017-08-13 19:50 ` Chris Murphy
2017-08-14 2:04 ` siranee.ja
2017-08-11 15:06 ` Chris Murphy
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CANznX5HUCXZFFUXGdD23cE59tP1LM2SDEXwdsjG13Jh+OeaZYQ@mail.gmail.com \
--to=toth.f.janos@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lists@colorremedies.com \
--cc=siranee.ja@tpc.co.th \
--cc=voravat@tpcorp.co.th \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).