Open Stack

On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 3:00 PM, Jeremy Stanley <fungi at yuggoth.org> wrote:

> On 2016-02-05 16:38:19 +0000 (+0000), Sam Yaple wrote:
> > I always forget to qualify that statement don't I? Nova does not
> > have a mechanism for _incremental_ backups. Nor does Nova have
> > compression or encryption because AFAIK that api only creates a
> > snapshot. I would also point out again that snapshots != backups,
> > at least not for those who care about backups.
>
> And just to be clear, you assert that the Nova team would reject
> extending their existing backup implementation to support this, so
> the only real solution is to make another project.
>

I don't know if Nova would reject it or not, but as discussed it could be
extended to Cinder. Should Nova ever backup Cinder volumes? Additionally,
why don't we combine networking into Nova? Or images? Or volumes? What I do
assert is that we have done alot of work to strip out components from Nova,
backups don't seem like a good candidate to shove into Nova.

Luckily since Ekko and Nova (just like Ekko and Freezer) don't have any
conflicting operations should Ekko be built separate and merged into Nova
it would be fairly painless process since there are no overlapping services.

Integration with Nova where Nova controls the hypervisor and Ekko requests
operations through the Nova api before doing the backup is another
question, and that is reasonable in my opinion. This is likely an issue
that can be addressed down the road rather than at this moment, though.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20160206/9fabe0e6/attachment.html>