Jump to content

Tables which our database backup slave can ignore


Recommended Posts

After we upgraded one of our forums we noticed a significant steady increase in disk usage for the volumes to the mysql server that handles these forums, although we upgraded only our smallest community.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/zbcy1fuqv7l4356/Skjermbilde 2015-09-07 kl. 12.11.56.png?dl=1

This caused alarms to go off at our host late Sunday evening and they had to prune several logs to temporarily solve the situation. 

The reason for the steady increase is that our host keep three days worth of bin-logs by default, that is also utilized by our backup-slave to ensure we have up to date backups at any time. The new core_cache-tables inserts a lot of rows because it caches every page by default for 30 seconds, which every one of those queries is then also included in the bin-logs. It now takes only 1 hour to fill up 2GB worth of binlogs, which over the course of three days is 144GB. 

While utilizing memcache for this or turning the cache off will resolve this, I'm trying to also map out which tables we can safely leave out of the database backup (except for the inclusion of the table structure).

So far I'm thinking of leaving out the rows inserted to the following tables from backups: 

  • core_cache
  • core_sessions
  • core_sys_cp_sessions
  • core_search_index

Any other tables? Some of these tables we should still keep?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Several times I read your topic.
What I think is that you are trying treated consequence.
Maybe it's better to find a problem as a result of the upgrade.
Caching  I do not think I have an idea.

If you post a link to this forum, I will do tests. Then if there is something that impressed me - will write.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what you mean. I'm simply asking which tables we can leave out of the backups with no serious implications. The information in core_cache and core_search_index are both information that can be rebuilt for example. While core_sessions and core_sys_cp_sessions contain information only relevant for a small amount of time.  So I'm really not sure why you think a link to the community is relevant for this question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Create New...