On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 2:23 PM, gordon chung <g...@live.ca> wrote: > > > On 03/02/2016 10:38 AM, Sam Yaple wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Jeremy Stanley < <fu...@yuggoth.org> > fu...@yuggoth.org> wrote: > >> On 2016-02-03 14:32:36 +0000 (+0000), Sam Yaple wrote: >> [...] >> > Luckily, digging into it it appears cinder already has all the >> > infrastructure in place to handle what we had talked about in a >> > separate email thread Duncan. It is very possible Ekko can >> > leverage the existing features to do it's backup with no change >> > from Cinder. >> [...] >> >> <devils_advocate>If Cinder's backup facilities already do most of >> what you want from it and there's only a little bit of development >> work required to add the missing feature, why jump to implementing >> this feature in a completely separate project instead rather than >> improving Cinder's existing solution so that people who have been >> using that can benefit directly?</devils_advocate> >> > > Backing up Cinder was never the initial goal, just a potential feature on > the roadmap. Nova is the main goal. > > i'll extend fungi's question, are the backup framework/mechanisms common > whether it be Nova or Cinder or anything else? or are they unique but only > grouped together as a service because they backup something. it seems the > problem is we've imagined the service as tackling a horizontal issue when > really it is just a vertical story that appears across many silos. > > The framework would not be common even between Ekko and Cinder, and there is no Nova "backup". The main featureset that will be utilized is CBT (changed-block-tracking) which is needed for efficient incremental backups. Otherwise the entire block device must be read each time a backup is performed. The design of Ekko solves the horizontal issue of scaling backups, there is also this vertical integration that _can_ be done to make the whole experience more pleasant and reliable. Since Nova has no backup mechanism this is clearly a gap and that was the issue Ekko wants to solve. Also backuping up Cinder volumes is on the roadmap, but has not been a stated priority.
Sam Yaple > cheers, > > -- > gord > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
