Comments on: XtraBackup: Open Source Alternative for Innodb Hot Backup call for ideas

By: Vadim

Vadim — Mon, 18 May 2009 16:19:31 +0000

Claudio,

We are open to integrate it, but we can’t force Zmanda to add support. If you are user of Zmanda you probably can send feature request to them to add support of xtrabackup.

By: Claudio Nanni

Claudio Nanni — Mon, 18 May 2009 14:22:47 +0000

I am using Zmanda, and what I like is easy configuration and scheduling of backups, and reports.
It gives you a good visibility on what is going on with your backups.
Zmanda is not a backup tool but more precisely a backup managing tool,
it uses all known backup solutions already existing.
I dont know if it is good to have this features in Xtrabackup or just think if it would be possible to integrate Xtrabackup into Zmanda like innodb hot backup is. Just some ideas.
Cheers
Claudio

By: R. Iqbal

R. Iqbal — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 12:24:36 +0000

Thanks. I’m going to try your software on my DB server

By: Vadim

Vadim — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 06:21:20 +0000

Shlomi, Bernd

Great, thank you for ideas, we added them to the list!

By: Bernd

Bernd — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 01:18:53 +0000

Yeah, sounds great!

few ideas:
- mysql/innodb is able to use raw partitions. as there are no .ibd files in this case, it would be nice to backup these as well. for those who made the decision to enable a raw partition, this could be a way to restore the backup using “normal” ibd files instead.

- having a small file indicating the binlog position along with the backup files could help enabling replication. (another way would be adding a “flush tables”, but if one has to use a hot backup tool, its unlikely that one wants to flush tables

By: thomas

thomas — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 00:01:02 +0000

Wow, sounds great. Finally some alternative to innodb hotbackup.
Don’t get me wrong, its a great tool but too expensive for my use case and there hasn’t been much development anymore.

By: Shlomi Noach

Shlomi Noach — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 07:07:29 +0000

Typo (how did I get it so wrong?) above:
“spliting logs” ==> “applying logs”

By: Shlomi Noach

Shlomi Noach — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 07:05:51 +0000

Hi,

Great to hear! Here are a few ideas:
* I was always upset with the fact the restore (ibbackup –apply-log) restores the ibdata and log files *in the same path* as the backup files. This made for harder work when disk space is limited.
The backup stage allows for different paths, which is nice. If you could have this simple feature – it would make a great difference.

* The restore part has the property of not letting you know how well it is progressing. I mean, there’s the unpacking of the ibdata file – great. But then it start “sppliting logs”, over and over and over, each time counting 0..100. You just never know if you should keep waiting for an hour or 5 hours (I got 5 hours a couple of weeks ago, and it was frustrating)
So – a progress indicator would be great!

* Obviously – if you could bundle the schema along with the data, it would be beneficial. It happened to me once, that due to a programmer’s mistake, the schema was changed while (or just before) creating the schema, but after I’ve dumped the schema to the new backup machine. So after hours of restoring from backup – I got errors as the schema was incorrect.

Good luck with development