Holy cow, 120 gigs in a database?
Also remember, you don't want a backup solution, you want a restoration solution :-)
this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2023
34 points (100.0% liked)
Selfhosted
60758 readers
158 users here now
A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.
Rules:
-
Be civil.
-
No spam.
-
Posts are to be related to self-hosting.
-
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.
-
Submission headline should match the article title.
-
No trolling.
-
Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details. Tags [CBH] or [AIP] are required, see the links in Rule 8 for details.
-
AI-related discussions and AI-involved promotional posts have additional requirements for tagging, as noted in Rule 7 and the AI & Promotional Post Expanded Rules post, and find example disclosures here.
Resources:
- selfh.st Newsletter and index of selfhosted software and apps
- awesome-selfhosted software
- awesome-sysadmin resources
- Self-Hosted Podcast from Jupiter Broadcasting
Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.
Questions? DM the mods!
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Hear hear! You don't own a backup if you've never restored it before. Words to live by both in corporate and self-hosting environments.
reading
Sound a lot like too much Docker :D
Ironically, if I would have had more services running in docker I might not have experienced such a fundamental outage. Since docker services usually tend to spin up their exclusive database engine you kind of "roll the dice" as far as data corruption goes with each docker service individually. Thing is, I don't really believe in bleeding CPU computation cycles by running redundant database services. And since many of my services are already very long-serving they've been set up from source and all funneled towards a single, central and busy database server - thus, if that one experiences sudden outage (for instance power failure) all kinds of corruption and despair can arise. ;-)
Guess I should really look into a small UPS and automated shutdown. On top of better backup management of course! Always the backups.
Why so much? A simple daily timer that runs mysqlcheck + mysqldump + a backup of that would be enough for most people. Using a solid OS (Debian) and a filesystem such as BTRFS, ZFS or XFS will also save you from power loss related corruption. Why do people go SO overkill with everything?
Keep it simple, less services, less processes, less overhead, pick well written software and script the rest. Everything works out way better if you don't overcomplicate things.
at least weekly mysqlcheck + mysqlddump and some form of periodic off-machine storing of that is something I'll surely take to heart after this lil' fiasco ;-) sound advice, thank you!
Personally I'd go for as big a UPS as I could afford, but I serve some public-facing stuff from my homelab and I live in an area with outdated infrastructure and occasional ice storms. I currently have a small UPS and have been too tired/overwhelmed to set up automated shutdown yet. It's not too hard though, I've done it before. And even without that in place, my small UPS has kept things going thru a bunch of <10 minute outages.
And if the power in your area sucks, the power conditioning even a good small UPS provides is invaluable.