I have Configured AWS RDS Postgresql 9.5 few months back. My DB size is almost 1TB. WHen ever i take a manual snapshot of my DB it is showing in Snapshot tab. Wanted to know the physical location of these files stored. My overall DB size is 2TB, I have taken some 20 snapshots. Where are these snapshot stored locally?
NOTE: I have not configured any S3 manually to store this snapshot.
Behind the scenes, the snapshot data is stored in Amazon S3. However, it is not accessible to you (it is stored in a bucket owned and managed by the Amazon RDS service).
You can only interact with the snapshots via the Amazon RDS console and API.
Snapshot Pricing
From Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL Pricing – Amazon Web Services:
There is no additional charge for backup storage up to 100% of your total database storage for a region. (Based on our experience as database administrators, the vast majority of databases require less raw storage for a backup than for the primary dataset, meaning that most customers will never pay for backup storage.)
After the DB instance is terminated, backup storage is billed at $0.095 per GiB-month.
Additional backup storage is $0.095 per GiB-month.
Related
I have a requirement of checking whether the exact copy of master database from AWS RDS can be created in on premises or not..
I have already established the connectivity between on prem and aws. Also checked the data migration using pg dump. But i am not getting how to create the replica without using DMS. Due to some security purpose we are not supposed to use DMS. So is there any other way out to implement thi ?
Any help will be much appreciated
It appears that your goal is disaster recovery.
Amazon RDS offers a few options for this:
Amazon RDS Snapshots are a backup of the database, stored in a region. If your database is in an Availability Zone that fails, the snapshot can be restored as a new database in another AZ. All AZs are physically separate data centers, much like your own data center is physically separate from an AWS data center.
Snapshots can also be copied to other Regions, which would guarantee a separation distance between data centers.
Multi-AZ Amazon RDS Databases keep a second copy of the data in another AZ and can switch-over to the alternate AZ without losing any data. This is faster than restoring a snapshot, but costs twice as much since two separate database servers are deployed.
These options would be easier to manage than replicating your data to an on-premises system. A Multi-AZ will automatically start the secondary instance, so your app can continue operating with only a short delay and no data loss. This is much better than you could offer if you fail-over to an on-premises system.
I want to create a free tier clone of a production AWS RDS PostgreSQL. As per my understanding, following are different ways
create a snapshot of the production DB and restore it on t2.micro
create a read replica of the production DB using t2.micro and then detach it as independent database
create a free tier database and restore a database dump of the production db
Option 3 is my last preference.
The problem is while creating read replica or restoring from snapshot, AWS doesn't explicitly allow to choose the free tier template. I just want to know if restoring to t2.micro without any advanced features like autoscaling, performance monitoring etc. is equivalent to free tier or not? I read here that the key thing with AWS production DB is that AWS provisions a secondary database provisioned to fallback in event of failure of the primary database or the Availability Zone in which the database is running.
AWS Free Tier doesn't actually care about the kind of service you use. Per their website you just get 750 instance hours per month for a db.t2.micro.
You can use these in any service you see fit and the discount will be applied automatically for the first 12 months.
Looking at the pricing page for RDS Postgres I can see, that these instances aren't listed anymore, which seems weird. The t2 instance family is fairly old, so they're probably trying to phase it out, but typically you can provision older instance types using the API directly if they're not available in the Console.
So what you want to do is create your db.t2.micro instance using one of the SDKs or the AWS CLI and restore from a snapshot. Alternatively you can create a read replica from the CLI and set the class to db.t2.micro. Later detaching that from the main cluster should work.
The production ready stuff refers to the Multi-AZ deployment, which is good for production use, but for anything production related a t2.micro seems like a bad choice, so I'm going to assume you're not planing to do that.
I have created one DocumentDB cluster in AWS with two instance running in it, but I need to know the exact storage which will be used for storing the data and also how AWS charge for one cluster.
When you provision an Amazon DocumentDB cluster, you don’t need to specify how much storage or I/Os you need for your cluster. Amazon DocumentDB uses a unique storage system that automatically scales from 10 GB up to 64 TB of data per cluster in 10 GB increments.
Storage is at the cluster level, which means all your instances share the storage. You can view how much storage are you using my monitoring the VolumeBytesUsed metric in the Monitoring tab of your Amazon DocumentDB console. Storage in DocumentDB is priced as low as $0.02 per GB/month (prices may vary across AWS regions). Details here - https://aws.amazon.com/documentdb/pricing/. To how much you are paying for storage, you can also go to the AWS Billing console and view the details of your DocumentDB bill
I wanted to automate taking snapshots of the volume attached to an EC2 instance running the primary node of our production MongoDB replicaSet. While trying to gauge the pitfalls and best practices over Google, I came across the fact that data inconsistency and corruption are very much possible while creating a snapshot but not of journaling is enabled, which it is in our case.
So my question is - is it safe to go ahead and execute aws ec2 create-snapshot --volume-id <volume-id> to get clean backups of my data?
Moreover, I plan on running the same command via a cron job that runs once every week. Is that a good enough plan to have scheduled backups?
For MongoDB on an EC2 instance I do the following:
mongodump to a backup directory on the EBS volume
zip the mongodump output directory
copy the zip file to an S3 bucket (with encryption and versioning enabled)
initiate a snapshot of the EBS volume
I write a script to perform the above tasks, and schedule it to run daily via cron. Now you will have a backup of the database on the EC2 instance, in the EBS snapshot, and on S3. You could go one step further by enabling cross region replication on the S3 bucket.
This setup provides multiple levels of backup. You should now be able to recover your database in the event of an EC2 failure, an EBS failure, an AWS Availability Zone failure or even a complete AWS Region failure.
I would recommend reading the official MongoDB documentation on EC2 deployments:
https://docs.mongodb.org/ecosystem/platforms/amazon-ec2/
https://docs.mongodb.org/ecosystem/tutorial/backup-and-restore-mongodb-on-amazon-ec2/
I'm getting ready to move our posgresql databases to EC2 but I'm a little unclear on the best backup and recovery strategy. The original plan was to build an EBS backed server, set up WAL-E to handle WAL archiving and base backups to S3. I would take snapshots of the final production server volume to be used if the instance crashed. I also see that many people perform frequent snapshots of the EBS for recovery purposes.
What is the recommended strategy? Is there a reason to archive with WAL and perform scheduled EBS snapshots?
The EBS Snapshots will give you a slightly different type of backup than then WAL-E backups. EBS backups the entire drives, which means if your EC2 Virt goes down you can just restart the virt with your last EBS snapshot and things will pickup right where you last snapshotted things.
The frequency of your EBS snapshots would define how good your database backups are.
The appealing thing about WAL-E is the "continuous archiving". If I needed every DB transaction backed up, then WAL-E seems the right choice. Manys apps I can envision cannot afford to lose transactions, so that seems a very prudent choice.
I think your plan to snapshot the production volumes as a baseline, then use WAL-E to continuously archive the database seems very reasonable. Personally I would likely add a periodic snapshot (once a day?) to that plan just to take a hard baseline and make your recovery process a bit easier.
The usual caveat of "Test your recovery plans!" applies here. You're mixing a number of technologies (EC2, EBS, Postgres, Snapshots, S3, WAL-E) so making sure you can actually recover - rather than just back - is of critical importance.
EBS snapshots will save the image of an entire disk, so you can back up all the disks in the server and recover it as a whole in case of data loss or disaster. Besides that, the block-level property of EBS snapshots allows instant recovery, you can have a 1TB database restored and have it up and running in a few minutes. To recover a 1TB database from scratch using a file based solution (like WAL-E) will require copying the data from S3 first, a process that will take hours. Using WAL files for recovery is a good approach, since you can go back to any time by transaction, but snapshotting the entire server will include WAL files as well, so you’ll still have that option. The backup and rapid recovery process using EBS snapshots can be automated with scripts or EC2 backup solutions (for example, Backup solutions for AWS EC2 instances).