I suppose in a pinch having data from MEMORY tables is not a bad thing though I tend to run under the assumption that data should be assumed to be volatile. I wonder, in terms of consistency, where having locked backups of MEMORY tables would be beneficial. My thought is it's probably safe to use --single-transaction there. Backing up the data probably does not hurt to do normally but I'm not sure forcing locks in this case is worth it.
As far as engines go, I tend to agree with Andy that it would be a good case to modify behaviors using the tools already at our disposal (multiple backups sets, filters, specifying lock types, etc.). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Holland Discuss, which is subscribed to holland-backup. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/670192 Title: Specify engines to be treated as transactional Status in Holland Backup Framework: Incomplete Bug description: It would be useful to have a configuration option to specify which engines are to be considered transactional when determining whether or not to use --single-transaction in mysqldump providers. An example would be a schema that has 5 InnoDB tables and one HEAP table being downgraded to using --lock-tables. _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~holland-coredev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~holland-coredev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
