An alternative backup strategy is to directly copy the files that LightDB uses to store the data in the database; Section 16.2 explains where these files are located. You can use whatever method you prefer for doing file system backups; for example:
tar -cf backup.tar /usr/local/lightdb-x/data
There are two restrictions, however, which make this method impractical, or at least inferior to the lt_dump method:
The database server must be shut down in order to
get a usable backup. Half-way measures such as disallowing all
connections will not work
(in part because tar and similar tools do not take
an atomic snapshot of the state of the file system,
but also because of internal buffering within the server).
Information about stopping the server can be found in
Section 16.5. Needless to say, you
also need to shut down the server before restoring the data.
If you have dug into the details of the file system layout of the
database, you might be tempted to try to back up or restore only certain
individual tables or databases from their respective files or
directories. This will not work because the
information contained in these files is not usable without
the commit log files,
lt_xact/*, which contain the commit status of
all transactions. A table file is only usable with this
information. Of course it is also impossible to restore only a
table and the associated lt_xact data
because that would render all other tables in the database
cluster useless. So file system backups only work for complete
backup and restoration of an entire database cluster.
An alternative file-system backup approach is to make a
“consistent snapshot” of the data directory, if the
file system supports that functionality (and you are willing to
trust that it is implemented correctly). The typical procedure is
to make a “frozen snapshot” of the volume containing the
database, then copy the whole data directory (not just parts, see
above) from the snapshot to a backup device, then release the frozen
snapshot. This will work even while the database server is running.
However, a backup created in this way saves
the database files in a state as if the database server was not
properly shut down; therefore, when you start the database server
on the backed-up data, it will think the previous server instance
crashed and will replay the WAL log. This is not a problem; just
be aware of it (and be sure to include the WAL files in your backup).
You can perform a CHECKPOINT before taking the
snapshot to reduce recovery time.
If your database is spread across multiple file systems, there might not be any way to obtain exactly-simultaneous frozen snapshots of all the volumes. For example, if your data files and WAL log are on different disks, or if tablespaces are on different file systems, it might not be possible to use snapshot backup because the snapshots must be simultaneous. Read your file system documentation very carefully before trusting the consistent-snapshot technique in such situations.
If simultaneous snapshots are not possible, one option is to shut down the database server long enough to establish all the frozen snapshots. Another option is to perform a continuous archiving base backup (Section 23.3.2) because such backups are immune to file system changes during the backup. This requires enabling continuous archiving just during the backup process; restore is done using continuous archive recovery (Section 23.3.4).
Another option is to use rsync to perform a file
system backup. This is done by first running rsync
while the database server is running, then shutting down the database
server long enough to do an rsync --checksum.
(--checksum is necessary because rsync only
has file modification-time granularity of one second.) The
second rsync will be quicker than the first,
because it has relatively little data to transfer, and the end result
will be consistent because the server was down. This method
allows a file system backup to be performed with minimal downtime.
Note that a file system backup will typically be larger than an SQL dump. (lt_dump does not need to dump the contents of indexes for example, just the commands to recreate them.) However, taking a file system backup might be faster.