Open Stack

On 2 February 2016 at 02:28, Sam Yaple <samuel at yaple.net> wrote:

>
> I disagree with this statement strongly as I have stated before. Nova has
> snapshots. Cinder has snapshots (though they do say cinder-backup). Freezer
> wraps Nova and Cinder. Snapshots are not backups. They are certainly not
> _incremental_ backups. They can have neither compression, nor encryption.
> With this in mind, Freezer does not have this "feature" at all. Its not
> that it needs improvement, it simply does not exist in Freezer. So a
> separate project dedicated to that one goal is not unreasonable. The real
> question is whether it is practical to merge Freezer and Ekko, and this is
> the question Ekko and the Freezer team are attempting to answer.
>

You're misinformed of the cinder feature set there - cinder has both
snapshots (usually fast COW thing on the same storage backend) and backups
(copy to a different storage backend, usually swift but might be
NFS/ceph/TSM) - the backups support incremental and compression. Separate
encryption to the volume encryption is not yet supported or implemented,
merely because nobody has written it yet. There's also live backup
(internally via a snapshot) merged last cycle.

I can see a place for other backup solutions, I just want to make the
existing ones clear.

-- 
Duncan Thomas
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20160203/58113c85/attachment.html>