[Labs-l] Incremental backups or alternative

[Daniel Schwen]

Sure, git is great for source code, but with git you initiate the "backup"
process whenever you make a change. For data this sounds less suitable. I
would suggest rdiff-backup for that.

On Fri, Jun 19, 2015, 7:02 AM Jaime Crespo <jcrespo at wikimedia.org> wrote:

> Hello, Petr,
>
> I am not a labs admin, but...
>
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Petr Bena <benapetr at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Source code should be definitely hosted in git repositories, as for
>> databases, if we had some more advanced db's on labs such as postgres,
>> there are features like
>> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.2/static/continuous-archiving.html
>> which can handle this kind of problems.
>>
>
> If with "some more advanced db" you mean postgres and not mysql:
>
> * MySQL/MariaDB was not affected by the outage
> * MySQL/MariaDB has point in time recovery enabled at all time, on all
> hosts, labs and non-labs. As recommended reading: <
> https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.6/en/point-in-time-recovery.html>
> * Extra DB redundancy for tools (not only for wiki replicas) will be
> rolled in as soon as there is hardware for it (already planned)
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Jaime Crespo
> <http://wikimedia.org>
>  _______________________________________________
> Labs-l mailing list
> Labs-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/labs-l
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/labs-l/attachments/20150621/f7b3bbbc/attachment.html>