<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 3/19/2018 10:55 PM, TommyLike Hu
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAE-tKw=01K_qYHPJZXb0PzLOOZSS6qidvLg0mqES1um7QYBAwA@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Now Cinder can transfer volume (with or without snapshots)
to different projects, and this make it possbile to transfer
data across tenant via volume or image. Recently we had a
conversation with our customer from Germany, they mentioned
they are more pleased if we can support transfer data accross
tenant via backup not image or volume, and these below are
some of their concerns:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>1. There is a use case that they would like to deploy their
develop/test/product systems in the same region but within
different tenants, so they have the requirment to
share/transfer data across tenants.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>2. Users are more willing to use backups to secure/store
their volume data since backup feature is more advanced in
product openstack version (incremental backups/periodic
backups/etc.).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>3. Volume transfer is not a valid option as it's in AZ and
it's a complicated process if we would like to share the data
to multiple projects (keep copy in all the tenants).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>4. Most of the users would like to use image for bootable
volume only and share volume data via image means the users
have to maintain lots of image copies when volume backup
changed as well as the whole system needs to differentiate
bootable images and none bootable images, most important, we
can not restore volume data via image now.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>5. The easiest way for this seems to support sharing backup
to different projects, the owner project have the full
authority while shared projects only can view/read the
backups.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>6. AWS has the similar concept, share snapshot. We can
share it by modify the snapshot's create volume permissions
[1].</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Looking forward to any like or dislike or suggestion on
this idea accroding to my feature proposal experience:)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks</div>
<div>TommyLike</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>[1]: <a
href="https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/ebs-modifying-snapshot-permissions.html"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/ebs-modifying-snapshot-permissions.html</a></div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe">OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
Tommy,<br>
<br>
As discussed at the PTG, this still sounds like improper usage of
Backup. Happy to hear input from others but I am having trouble
getting my head around it.<br>
<br>
The idea of sharing a snapshot, as you mention AWS supports sounds
like it could be a more sensible approach. Why are you not
proposing that?<br>
<br>
Jay<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>