Open Stack

On 03/02/2016 10:38 AM, Sam Yaple wrote:
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Jeremy Stanley <<mailto:fungi at yuggoth.org>fungi at yuggoth.org<mailto:fungi at 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.

cheers,

--
gord
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20160204/75ea922d/attachment.html>