dan wrote:

> the problem with backing up a database  incrementally is that as the  
> database grows the backups bloat up as they do not get any benefit  
> from the incremental backup.
>
> with a database, it is usually better to replicate the database to  
> another host and then do periodic dumps.
>
> web pages are very typically static on disk.  it is a good practice  
> to make your website completely read-only so there would be no  
> writes to local files.  The only writes should be to the cache and  
> to an attached database.
>
> I would suggest you do periodic dumps of the database and then  
> backup the directory where you put those dumps.  I would also  
> suggest that you replicate the database to another machine.  Keep in  
> mind that if you are not going to have an hot spare database server,  
> you can replicate a heavily used database to very modest hardware  
> because it doesnt need to server requests.  The nice thing about  
> online replication is that you can replicate and then shut down the  
> second database and do the dump from there so you never have to shut  
> down the main database.

I believe a lot of databases these days don't need to be shut down to  
create a dump. And we still don't know what the situation is (what  
kind of database, how much data). Using a separate server for  
replication may very well be overkill.

Nils Breunese.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada.
The future of the web can't happen without you.  Join us at MIX09 to help
pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/
_______________________________________________
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
List:    https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:    http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/