Open Stack

On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 2:23 PM, gordon chung <gord at live.ca> wrote:

>
>
> On 03/02/2016 10:38 AM, Sam Yaple wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Jeremy Stanley < <fungi at yuggoth.org>
> 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.
>
>
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-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20160205/770f930a/attachment.html>