# innobackupex --no-lock and innodb mixed with MyISAM tables

**URL:** <https://forums.percona.com/t/innobackupex-no-lock-and-innodb-mixed-with-myisam-tables/2205>\
**Category:** Percona XtraBackup\
**Created:** [February 9, 2012, 1:42am UTC](https://forums.percona.com/t/innobackupex-no-lock-and-innodb-mixed-with-myisam-tables/2205 "2012-02-09T01:42:49Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![sashko](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/3ab097/32.png) [@sashko](https://forums.percona.com/u/sashko)\
**Post date:** [February 9, 2012, 1:42am UTC](https://forums.percona.com/t/innobackupex-no-lock-and-innodb-mixed-with-myisam-tables/2205/1 "2012-02-09T01:42:49Z")

</div>

Hi everyone,

I’m trying to figure out what the best solution is to use innobackupex with a db server that has around 4000 databases where most tables are innodb, but some are MyISAM. When --no-lock is not used, innobackupex issues ‘flush tables with read lock’ to backup myisam tables and .frm files. With 4000 databases, it takes a long time to copy all .frm files while the server is locked. What would be a better solution to not lock all tables, but still copy all .frm files, and only lock the tables to copy MyISAM files that were created since the backup started?

I assume if I didn’t use the --no-lock option, with 4000 databases innobackup will lock the whole server for a long time to just copy the .frm files.

Any thoughts?

Thanks in advance!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![xaprb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/49beb7/32.png) [@xaprb](https://forums.percona.com/u/xaprb)\
**Post date:** [February 17, 2012, 3:41pm UTC](https://forums.percona.com/t/innobackupex-no-lock-and-innodb-mixed-with-myisam-tables/2205/2 "2012-02-17T15:41:00Z")

</div>

I believe an upcoming (or recently released?) version of innobackupex solves this with a two-phase .frm rsync. The first one is done without a lock in place.