Open Stack

On 18 May 2014 12:32, Murali Balcha <Murali.Balcha at triliodata.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> I did a design session on Friday though my proposal was to capture the
> delta as qcow2. Here is the link to ether pad notes.
>
> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/juno-cinder-changed-block-list
>
>
> Do you see synergies between what you are proposing and my proposal?
> Shouldn¹t we standardize on one format for all backups? I believe Cinder
> backup API currently uses JSON based list with pointers to all swift
> objects that make up the backup data of a volume.

I think the problem being referred to in this thread is that the
backup code assumes the *source* is a raw volume. The destination
(i.e. swift) should absolutely remain universal across all volume
back-ends - a JSON list with pointers. The JSON file is versioned, so
there is scope to add more to it (like we did volume metadata), but I
don't want to see QCOW or similar going into swift.