[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Backup strategy sanity check

From: Thomas Harold <thomas-lists_at_nybeta.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2013 10:53:43 -0400

On 7/25/2013 7:30 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 03:22:11PM -0400, Thomas Harold wrote:
>> What we might do once 1.8 server is stable is switch to doing the
>> new "incremental" style hotcopy on Mon-Sat evenings and do a full
>> hotcopy on Sun.
> In Subversion 1.8, a full hotcopy is implemented as an incremental
> hotcopy into an emtpy target repository. There is no point in copying
> everything again on a Sunday because that just repeats work that's
> already been done.

During our upgrade process, we tried this (running svnadmin hotcopy
without blowing away the target directory first). We ran into an issue
that svnadmin hotcopy will not backup if the target directory is a
different format.

Old style of doing hotcopy backups:

1) rm -rf /backup/svnhotcopy/reponame
2) svnadmin hotcopy /var/svn/reponame /backup/svnhotcopy/reponame

Foolproof and always does the right thing. Downside is the extra disk
writes from redoing everything from scratch. (Our solution was to only
hotcopy repositories that had changes within the last N days. Which
reduced our nightly backup workload.)

With the 'svnadmin hotcopy --incremental' backups, we have to do extra
checking in the script (comparing reponame/db/format versions) in order
to make sure that the hotcopy runs correctly.

It would have been nice if --incremental would automatically upgrade the
target repository (and fallback to a full backup) if the versions mismatch.
Received on 2013-08-10 16:54:28 CEST

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Users mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.