Am 01.10.2012 um 20:24 schrieb Tim Dunphy: > Hello list, > > I am soliciting opinion here as opposed technical help with an idea I > have. I've setup a bacula backup system on an AWS volume. Bacula stores a > LOT of information in it's mysql database (in my setup, you can also use > postgres or sqlite if you chose). Since I've started doing this I notice > that the mysql data directory has swelled to over 700GB! That's quite a lot > and its' easting up valuable disk space. > > So I had an idea. What about uses the fuse based s3fs to mount an S3 > bucket on the local filesystem and use that as your mysql data dir? In > other words mount your s3 bucket on /var/lib/mysql > > I used this article to setup the s3fs file system > > http://benjisimon.blogspot.com/2011/01/setting-up-s3-backup-solution-on-centos.html > > And everything went as planned. So my question to you dear listers is if I > do start using a locally mounted s3 bucket as my mysqld data dir, will > performance of the database be acceptable? If so, why? If not are there any > other reasons why it would NOT be a good idea to do this? > > The steps I have in mind are basically this: > > 1) mysqldump --all-databases > alldb.sql > 2) stop mysql > 3) rm -rf /var/lib/mysql/* > 4) mount the s3 bucket on /var/lib/mysql > 5) start mysql > 6) restore the alldb.sql dump your motivation is to save the resources that are occupied by /var/lib/mysql ?? please check the size of your "mysqldump --all-databases > alldb.sql". Is the dump also so big? -- LF