[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [rdiff-backup-users] Weird behavior of rdiff-backup : founding diffs
From: |
Robert Nichols |
Subject: |
Re: [rdiff-backup-users] Weird behavior of rdiff-backup : founding diffs while there isn't |
Date: |
Tue, 20 Nov 2012 08:38:33 -0600 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.10) Gecko/20121029 Thunderbird/10.0.10 |
On 11/20/2012 02:53 AM, address@hidden wrote:
I also think problem is definitely LDAP, more precisely that machine is not able
to get access to LDAP server during a time lap.
And I think I found the reason (actually when waking up on this morning (seems
it was good to sleep on it). ;-)
The 2 machines are starting their respective backup at the same hour and the one
with the LDAP server is shutting it down during backup (voluntarily) to prevent
partial/corrupted data backup.
Thus the other machine is probably not able to resolve user names during a small
time.
So a good way to fix the issue will probably to postpone one the backup to an
hour where I'm sure that the other one is no more running.
I would say there is no "probably" about it. Another option might be to put the
database in read-only mode during the backup and then restart the server in
read/write mode afterward, but that would still leave a momentary gap in service
while the server is being restarted. You might need to delay the restart until
_both_ backups were complete. I'm no LDAP expert (never used it, in fact), so
take that with a grain (or two) of salt.
However I think that the "--preserve-numerical-ids" option that you suggested
can also do the job. So I have add it to the rdiff-backup so it will be tested
during next backup.
Then only I will time shift one of the backup, but if the option is well
working, that will be an extra data-safety feature.
As I said, I have doubts about whether that will help. The names are still
recorded in the mirror_metadata file even when "--preserve-numerical-ids" is
used.
So I'm more than very thankful to you for all your complete and helpful answers.
;-)
No problem. Those of us who lurk on this list do it because we enjoy
tracking down issues like this.
--
Bob Nichols "NOSPAM" is really part of my email address.
Do NOT delete it.
- [rdiff-backup-users] Weird behavior of rdiff-backup : founding diffs while there isn't, Matthieu . Rioteau, 2012/11/16
- Re: [rdiff-backup-users] Weird behavior of rdiff-backup : founding diffs while there isn't, Nicolas Jungers, 2012/11/17
- Re: [rdiff-backup-users] Weird behavior of rdiff-backup : founding diffs while there isn't, Robert Nichols, 2012/11/17
- Re: [rdiff-backup-users] Weird behavior of rdiff-backup : founding diffs while there isn't, Matthieu . Rioteau, 2012/11/19
- Re: [rdiff-backup-users] Weird behavior of rdiff-backup : founding diffs while there isn't, Robert Nichols, 2012/11/19
- Re: [rdiff-backup-users] Weird behavior of rdiff-backup : founding diffs while there isn't, Matthieu . Rioteau, 2012/11/19
- Re: [rdiff-backup-users] Weird behavior of rdiff-backup : founding diffs while there isn't, Robert Nichols, 2012/11/19
- Re: [rdiff-backup-users] Weird behavior of rdiff-backup : founding diffs while there isn't, Matthieu . Rioteau, 2012/11/20
- Re: [rdiff-backup-users] Weird behavior of rdiff-backup : founding diffs while there isn't,
Robert Nichols <=
- Re: [rdiff-backup-users] Weird behavior of rdiff-backup : founding diffs while there isn't, Matthieu . Rioteau, 2012/11/21
- Re: [rdiff-backup-users] Weird behavior of rdiff-backup : founding diffs while there isn't, Robert Nichols, 2012/11/21
- Re: [rdiff-backup-users] Weird behavior of rdiff-backup : founding diffs while there isn't, Matthieu . Rioteau, 2012/11/22