<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?><!-- generator="b2evolution/2.4.6" -->
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
	<channel>
		<title>Red5, OpenLaszlo, ColdFusion, OpenVZ, Joomla - Latest comments on Using vzdump snapshot to backup without downtime</title>
		<link>http://weblogs.amtex.nl/index.php?blog=2&#38;disp=comments</link>
		<description></description>
		<language>en-EU</language>
		<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss</docs>
		<admin:generatorAgent rdf:resource="http://b2evolution.net/?v=2.4.6"/>
		<ttl>60</ttl>
				<item>
			<title>In response to: Using vzdump snapshot to backup without downtime</title>
			<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 09:07:16 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Greg [Visitor]</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">c248@http://weblogs.amtex.nl/</guid>
			<description>Excellent article except that i'm a kind of newbie and i'm lost with what needs to be done here. i installed a new server with proxmox and i get the &quot;ERROR: unable to detect lvm volume group, using 'suspend' mode&quot; error when trying the snapshot from its interface. other types work fine. &lt;br /&gt;
Is there a way to apply when server is already running with proxmox? do I need to do it on each created VE or is it at the root level and then how to apply? any help needed. &lt;br /&gt;
Thanks</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[Excellent article except that i'm a kind of newbie and i'm lost with what needs to be done here. i installed a new server with proxmox and i get the "ERROR: unable to detect lvm volume group, using 'suspend' mode" error when trying the snapshot from its interface. other types work fine. <br />
Is there a way to apply when server is already running with proxmox? do I need to do it on each created VE or is it at the root level and then how to apply? any help needed. <br />
Thanks]]></content:encoded>
			<link>http://weblogs.amtex.nl/index.php/2007/10/08/using_vzdump_snapshot_to_backup_without_downtime?blog=2#c248</link>
		</item>
				<item>
			<title>In response to: Using vzdump snapshot to backup without downtime</title>
			<pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2009 20:29:14 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Robert - Lagniappe Internet [Visitor]</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">c246@http://weblogs.amtex.nl/</guid>
			<description>Depends on the fs being backed up. Not the size of the fs, but how often writes occur. The snapshot volume holds new / changed data to be written to disk. This allows the snapshot itself to remain static while the backup occurs. When the umount occurs the writes are then flushed to the real fs. So the snapshot volume MUST be able to hold every write that occurs while the backup is being performed. A small website with some email accounts would need much less snapshot space than say a picture hosting site. And the best part is all of the re-direction occurs behind the scenes so your application never need know it's being backed up. </description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[Depends on the fs being backed up. Not the size of the fs, but how often writes occur. The snapshot volume holds new / changed data to be written to disk. This allows the snapshot itself to remain static while the backup occurs. When the umount occurs the writes are then flushed to the real fs. So the snapshot volume MUST be able to hold every write that occurs while the backup is being performed. A small website with some email accounts would need much less snapshot space than say a picture hosting site. And the best part is all of the re-direction occurs behind the scenes so your application never need know it's being backed up. ]]></content:encoded>
			<link>http://weblogs.amtex.nl/index.php/2007/10/08/using_vzdump_snapshot_to_backup_without_downtime?blog=2#c246</link>
		</item>
				<item>
			<title>In response to: Using vzdump snapshot to backup without downtime</title>
			<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 16:38:08 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>goe [Visitor]</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">c244@http://weblogs.amtex.nl/</guid>
			<description>so 512MB are enough even for snapshots of big containers of, say, 100GB and more?</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[so 512MB are enough even for snapshots of big containers of, say, 100GB and more?]]></content:encoded>
			<link>http://weblogs.amtex.nl/index.php/2007/10/08/using_vzdump_snapshot_to_backup_without_downtime?blog=2#c244</link>
		</item>
				<item>
			<title>In response to: Using vzdump snapshot to backup without downtime</title>
			<pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 22:12:40 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Michael Renner [Visitor]</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">c240@http://weblogs.amtex.nl/</guid>
			<description>fwiw - the &quot;swapsize 2 times internal memory&quot; constant is very outdated and quite harmful if applied on &quot;modern&quot; systems.</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[fwiw - the "swapsize 2 times internal memory" constant is very outdated and quite harmful if applied on "modern" systems.]]></content:encoded>
			<link>http://weblogs.amtex.nl/index.php/2007/10/08/using_vzdump_snapshot_to_backup_without_downtime?blog=2#c240</link>
		</item>
			</channel>
</rss>
