3 ms·
This is nice but it appears that the entire database instance gets rolled back to that point. It'd be a lot nicer if it could be done at a per-db or per-table g
by gtsteve 8y ago
This is nice but it appears that the entire database instance gets rolled back to that point. It'd be a lot nicer if it could be done at a per-db or per-table granularity.
Realistically I'd never use this feature because of the risk of data loss. I'd restore a new instance from backups and copy the lost data back over manually.
- ben174 8y ago> per-table granularity Sounds like a nightmare as far as relationships are concerned.
- ryanianian 8y ago> It'd be a lot nicer if it could be done at a per-db or per-table granularity. As another commenter pointed out, per-table would be scary for referential-integrity. And per-db kinda makes sense, but if you've got totally different use-cases hosted by the same MySQL you may be using the service incorrectly. > I'd restore a new instance from backups and copy the lost data back over manually. That's always been possible, but even with the best instances and most iops it could take hours to do that. So it's really designed for a different scenario.
- gtsteve 8y agoRegarding referential integrity I don't disagree. It would be a process to be performed by an expert in who understands the data structures and what the effect of rolling them back would be. I might be wrong but I believe Aurora backups can be restored quite a bit quicker than that, right? We are evaluating Aurora at work, hence my interest.