cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Will Stevens <wstev...@cloudops.com>
Subject Re: [Propose][New Feature] Storage Snapshots
Date Mon, 08 Feb 2016 19:11:52 GMT
Sorry.  I missed a bit of context when I responded.  The global setting
would be only for the managed storage case, currently being called Storage
Snapshots, and is only to determine if a copy is pushed to secondary
storage right?  The global setting would not change the behavior of the
Volume Snapshots right?

I was referring to the need for Volume Snapshots and Storage Snapshots to
exist together.  Disregard my comment.  I caught up on context after I
posted.  My bad...

*Will STEVENS*
Lead Developer

*CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 2:05 PM, Mike Tutkowski <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
> wrote:

> Hey Will,
>
> Who's picking the behavior? Is it the cloud provider or the end user?
>
> Thanks
>
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 11:52 AM, Will Stevens <wstevens@cloudops.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I don't think a global setting is a good option because we need both
> > functionality to be available at the same time and for different use
> cases
> > to be able to pick which they choose.
> >
> > *Will STEVENS*
> > Lead Developer
> >
> > *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
> > 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
> > w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> > mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > Now that I re-read your e-mail, it dawned on me: The end-user doesn't
> > care
> > > where the snapshot is.
> > >
> > > If that's true, then we should perhaps control this via Global Settings
> > or
> > > something.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 11:46 AM, Mike Tutkowski <
> > > mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > It's not ideal - true, but it does allow us to be backward
> compatible.
> > > >
> > > > If you have other ideas, though, about how to maintain backward
> > > > compatibility, I'm definitely open to hear them.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks!
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 11:42 AM, Syed Mushtaq <
> syed1.mushtaq@gmail.com
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Hi Mike,
> > > >>
> > > >> Adding a flag to createSnapshot was the first and the most obvious
> > thing
> > > >> that came to our minds. The problem that I had with this was that:
> > > >>
> > > >> 1) I feel it is exposing something to the end user that is internal
> to
> > > the
> > > >> cloud.
> > > >>
> > > >> 2) We have to follow two different ways of restore/deletion in the
> > same
> > > >> code path depending on where the Snapshot resides which I find kind
> > of a
> > > >> bad design.
> > > >>
> > > >> But if exposing a archive flag to the end user is acceptable then we
> > can
> > > >> definitely use this instead of adding the StorageSnapshot API
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks,
> > > >> -Syed
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 1:26 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> > > >> mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
> > > >> > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Hi Pierre-Luc,
> > > >> >
> > > >> > My recommendation would be this:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Add an "archive" flag to the current volume-snapshot API. Its
> > default
> > > >> would
> > > >> > be "false" because that would be backward compatible with how 4.6
> > has
> > > >> > volume snapshots implemented (i.e. they stay on the SAN in 4.6,
> 4.7,
> > > and
> > > >> > 4.8).
> > > >> >
> > > >> > If you set archive=true, then we would perform a background
> > migration
> > > of
> > > >> > the snapshot from the SAN to the secondary storage (then delete
> the
> > > SAN
> > > >> > snapshot).
> > > >> >
> > > >> > That archive parameter would only be valid for managed storage.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Sound reasonable?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Also, a VM snapshot that includes disks provided by managed
> storage
> > > >> should
> > > >> > work.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Talk to you later,
> > > >> > Mike
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 9:22 AM, Pierre-Luc Dion <
> pdion@cloudops.com
> > >
> > > >> > wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > Mike,
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > In terms of API's, would you prefer introducing a parameter to
> the
> > > >> > existing
> > > >> > > VolumeSnapshot, example:   extract={true|false}  with a default
> > > value
> > > >> of
> > > >> > > true  which would extract snapshot into the secondary storage,
> > which
> > > >> is
> > > >> > the
> > > >> > > current default behavior. Then for SAN snapshot that remain on
> the
> > > >> SAN we
> > > >> > > would just set "extract=false" ?  as oppose to create a new
> > > >> > >  StorageSnapshot API ?
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Paul,
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > From what I'm seeing so far, we can't do a VM-snapshot when
> using
> > > >> managed
> > > >> > > storage for VM having more than one Volume. For the reason that
> > > >> snapshot
> > > >> > > are performed outside of the hypervisor awareness and
> > > asynchronously.
> > > >> If
> > > >> > > someone have a way to address that, it would make thinks much
> more
> > > >> > > attractive.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 10:57 AM, Ian Rae <irae@cloudops.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > I think a service provider backup scenario is more likely to
> > take
> > > >> > > advantage
> > > >> > > > of SAN snapshot. There are a few reasons for this. Traditional
> > > >> backups
> > > >> > > > involve access to the file system, and there is an expectation
> > > that
> > > >> > this
> > > >> > > > can be done with reasonably short time frames without
> negatively
> > > >> > > impacting
> > > >> > > > VM performance, and that the backup orchestrator can apply
> > various
> > > >> > logic
> > > >> > > > and or transformations to the data (compress, encrypt, deltas
> > > >> etc...).
> > > >> > > > While it is true that one could apply a backup process to a
> > cloud
> > > >> > > snapshot,
> > > >> > > > this would be slow and inefficient requiring the data to be
> > moved
> > > >> > several
> > > >> > > > times and there are some major bottlenecks with cloud
> snapshots.
> > > >> With a
> > > >> > > > cloud snapshot - there seems to be no reasonable expectation
> of
> > > >> being
> > > >> > > able
> > > >> > > > to do differential snapshots (I think this depends on the
> > > >> hypervisor)
> > > >> > and
> > > >> > > > if you do differential snapshots this will make file backups
> > from
> > > >> those
> > > >> > > > snapshots even more complicated to orchestrate.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > Suspect there needs to be a different thread on how to better
> > > enable
> > > >> > > > backups, as a service. As per Paul's suggestion, but it is a
> > > related
> > > >> > > > workflow so relevant to this discussion.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > Ian
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > On Monday, February 8, 2016, Mike Tutkowski <
> > > >> > > mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com>
> > > >> > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > > To me it sounds like number two and number three are
> different
> > > >> uses
> > > >> > for
> > > >> > > > the
> > > >> > > > > same "thing"(which is totally fine).
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > As for taking a fast SAN snapshot and exporting it
> > > >> asynchronously, do
> > > >> > > we
> > > >> > > > > see the SSVM as performing the export?
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > To be backwards compatible with what we have in 4.6 and
> later
> > > for
> > > >> > > volume
> > > >> > > > > snapshots for managed storage, I think it might be easier if
> > we
> > > >> pass
> > > >> > > in a
> > > >> > > > > flag that says whether or not to archive the SAN snapshot
> > > (which,
> > > >> I
> > > >> > > > think,
> > > >> > > > > is something that you suggested, as well, Pierre-Luc).
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > On Monday, February 8, 2016, Pierre-Luc Dion <
> > > pdion@cloudops.com
> > > >> > > > > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > Hi Mike,
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > The reason behind the creation of a SAN snapshot which is
> > > >> exported
> > > >> > > into
> > > >> > > > > > secondary storage, is because creating a copy of the .VHD
> > > >> directly
> > > >> > > > would
> > > >> > > > > > impact uptime of the VM as creating that copy take lots of
> > > time.
> > > >> > Has
> > > >> > > > > oppose
> > > >> > > > > > to a SAN snapshot that is close to instantaneous which can
> > > >> > afterward
> > > >> > > be
> > > >> > > > > > clone into Secondary Storage asynchronously.
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > I would suspect an extracted VolumeSnapshot taken from a
> SAN
> > > >> > snapshot
> > > >> > > > > could
> > > >> > > > > > have is SAN snapshot deleted to avoid duplica and space
> > > >> consumption
> > > >> > > on
> > > >> > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > Primary Storage side.
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > I see 3 definitions in our current discussion regarding
> the
> > > term
> > > >> > > > snapshot
> > > >> > > > > > (these are not official terminology but by own
> > interpretation
> > > of
> > > >> > > them):
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > 1. *Snapshot* (AKA: Storage Snapshot / Mike's definition
> of
> > a
> > > >> > > > snapshot):
> > > >> > > > > > it's a volume snapshot at the storage level, point in time
> > of
> > > >> your
> > > >> > > > data.
> > > >> > > > > it
> > > >> > > > > > reside on the primary storage. Useful and efficient for
> > > software
> > > >> > side
> > > >> > > > > > incident.
> > > >> > > > > > 2. *Cloud Snapshot *( AKA: CloudStack VolumeSnapshot/
> cloud
> > > >> backup
> > > >> > > > aws-S3
> > > >> > > > > > style ): Point in time copy of the Virtual Disk that
> reside
> > > on a
> > > >> > > > > different
> > > >> > > > > > storage array then the original Volume. Facilitate data
> > > >> migration
> > > >> > > > between
> > > >> > > > > > clusters and, in case of primary storage incident, Volume
> > > >> snapshots
> > > >> > > are
> > > >> > > > > not
> > > >> > > > > > impacted and can be reuse.
> > > >> > > > > > 3. *Backup*: Archival of your Virtual-machines data that
> > also
> > > >> > > validate
> > > >> > > > > data
> > > >> > > > > > integrity, provide a storage efficient archiving method
> and
> > an
> > > >> > > > > independent
> > > >> > > > > > way to restore your data in case of an major
> infrastructure
> > > >> > disaster.
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > Regards,
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > PL
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 1:34 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> > > >> > > > > > mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com <javascript:;>
> <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > So, let's see if I currently follow the requirements:
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > * Augment volume snapshots for managed storage to
> > > >> conditionally
> > > >> > > > export
> > > >> > > > > > data
> > > >> > > > > > > to NFS. The current process of taking a snapshot on the
> > SAN
> > > is
> > > >> > > fine,
> > > >> > > > > but
> > > >> > > > > > > we'd like the option to export the data to NFS, as well.
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > Questions:
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > Once the data has been exported to NFS, do we keep the
> SAN
> > > >> > snapshot
> > > >> > > > or
> > > >> > > > > > > delete it?
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > If we are deleting the SAN snapshot, then why don't we
> > just
> > > >> copy
> > > >> > > the
> > > >> > > > > VHD
> > > >> > > > > > > from primary to secondary the way we do today for
> > > non-managed
> > > >> > (i.e.
> > > >> > > > > > > traditional) storage? Why create a SAN snapshot in that
> > > >> scenario?
> > > >> > > > > Perhaps
> > > >> > > > > > > to have the SSVM mount and perform the VHD copy to
> > secondary
> > > >> > > storage
> > > >> > > > > > > instead of a XenServer host?
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > Thanks for the clarification.
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > By the way, to me a backup is when you copy data from
> one
> > > >> storage
> > > >> > > > > system
> > > >> > > > > > to
> > > >> > > > > > > another (regardless of features, if any, to restore the
> > data
> > > >> in
> > > >> > the
> > > >> > > > > > > future). A snapshot is a point-in-time view of the data
> > of a
> > > >> > volume
> > > >> > > > and
> > > >> > > > > > > it's stored on the same storage system as the volume.
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Pierre-Luc Dion <
> > > >> > > pdion@cloudops.com
> > > >> > > > > <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > > <javascript:;>>
> > > >> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > That's fun to see that discussion happening. I 100%
> > agree
> > > >> with
> > > >> > > > Paul's
> > > >> > > > > > > > points of view. VolumeSnapshot are not a backup, but I
> > do
> > > >> > > consider
> > > >> > > > > them
> > > >> > > > > > > as
> > > >> > > > > > > > a safety vest against Primary Storage failure, because
> > > >> failure
> > > >> > > > append
> > > >> > > > > > > :-( .
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > The current proposal around snapshots that reside on
> the
> > > >> > primary
> > > >> > > > > > storage
> > > >> > > > > > > or
> > > >> > > > > > > > snapshots that end in the Secondary Storage  is not to
> > > >> address
> > > >> > > any
> > > >> > > > > kind
> > > >> > > > > > > of
> > > >> > > > > > > > backups requirement because a snapshot is not a
> backup,
> > > >> event
> > > >> > an
> > > >> > > > > > > extracted
> > > >> > > > > > > > VM snapshot.
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > The main idea, and again this is for managed storage;
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > 1. StorageSnapshotAPI: Provide storage side snapshot
> > > >> capability
> > > >> > > for
> > > >> > > > > > fast
> > > >> > > > > > > > response time that support rollback to previous
> > timestamp,
> > > >> > create
> > > >> > > > new
> > > >> > > > > > > > volume and maybe create template.
> > > >> > > > > > > >     not required to be a new API if the work is
> already
> > > >> done, I
> > > >> > > > think
> > > >> > > > > > > this
> > > >> > > > > > > > is a different behaviors than the user expectation of
> a
> > > >> > > > > > volume-snapshot.
> > > >> > > > > > > > 2. VolumeSnapshotAPI: Provide current cloudstack
> > behavior
> > > >> that
> > > >> > > > create
> > > >> > > > > > an
> > > >> > > > > > > > extraction of a volume into SecondaryStorage which can
> > be
> > > >> reuse
> > > >> > > to
> > > >> > > > > > > create a
> > > >> > > > > > > > new volume into another Primary Storage. This type of
> > > >> snapshot
> > > >> > > is a
> > > >> > > > > > slow
> > > >> > > > > > > > job since yes it would have to copy the full volume
> size
> > > on
> > > >> the
> > > >> > > > > > Secondary
> > > >> > > > > > > > storage.
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > PL
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 12:45 PM, Syed Mushtaq <
> > > >> > > > > syed1.mushtaq@gmail.com <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > > <javascript:;>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > I think I share you view on the 'Ideal world'.
> Backup
> > > (via
> > > >> > > Volume
> > > >> > > > > > > > > Snapshots) is a huge bottleneck in Cloudstack. This
> is
> > > >> > > amplified
> > > >> > > > > > > > especially
> > > >> > > > > > > > > when you have a object storage as your secondary
> > storage
> > > >> > > because
> > > >> > > > it
> > > >> > > > > > > > > requires two copies (one to an NFS staging area and
> > from
> > > >> > there
> > > >> > > to
> > > >> > > > > > > object
> > > >> > > > > > > > > storage). And not to mention that all these copies
> are
> > > >> > > consuming
> > > >> > > > > > > > hypervisor
> > > >> > > > > > > > > resources. Xenserver's Dom0 is also a huge
> bottleneck
> > as
> > > >> all
> > > >> > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > Network
> > > >> > > > > > > > > and I/O flow through it. So our intention of
> proposing
> > > the
> > > >> > > > "Storage
> > > >> > > > > > > > > Snapshots" is to give a better way of achiving
> > snapshots
> > > >> > while
> > > >> > > > > still
> > > >> > > > > > > > > keeping the original definition of volume snpashots
> > (ie
> > > >> > upload
> > > >> > > to
> > > >> > > > > sec
> > > >> > > > > > > > > storage).
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > But as Erik pointed out volume snapshots are not
> > > backups.
> > > >> > They
> > > >> > > > > don't
> > > >> > > > > > > work
> > > >> > > > > > > > > form multi-disk LVM volume groups and dynamic
> disks. I
> > > am
> > > >> all
> > > >> > > in
> > > >> > > > > for
> > > >> > > > > > a
> > > >> > > > > > > > > better backup solution which handles these use cases
> > and
> > > >> > > utilizes
> > > >> > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > storage's advanced features.
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Paul Angus <
> > > >> > > > > > paul.angus@shapeblue.com <javascript:;> <javascript:;>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > In the beginning... there were CloudStack
> snapshots
> > > and
> > > >> > they
> > > >> > > > were
> > > >> > > > > > > > > actually
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > volume snapshots not hypervisor point-in-time
> > > snapshots.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > Then VM snapshots were created (which are
> > > point-in-time
> > > >> > > > > hypervisor
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > snapshots) and we started referring to the
> original
> > > >> > snapshots
> > > >> > > > as
> > > >> > > > > > > volume
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > snapshots.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > CloudStack does not offer 'backups', but many
> people
> > > use
> > > >> > > volume
> > > >> > > > > > > > snapshots
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > as backups. However you can't in-place restore
> > volume
> > > >> > > snapshots
> > > >> > > > > and
> > > >> > > > > > > if
> > > >> > > > > > > > > you
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > have a VM with multiple volumes, the volume
> > snapshots
> > > >> must
> > > >> > be
> > > >> > > > > done
> > > >> > > > > > in
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > series, meaning that the state across all of the
> > > >> volumes is
> > > >> > > > > > unlikely
> > > >> > > > > > > to
> > > >> > > > > > > > > be
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > consistent.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > 'Actual Backups' would enable all of the restore
> > > options
> > > >> > > which
> > > >> > > > > > users
> > > >> > > > > > > > > might
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > expect as well options as to where they might be
> > > >> stored. In
> > > >> > > my
> > > >> > > > > > ideal
> > > >> > > > > > > > > world
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > they would also be able to leverage back-end
> > hardware
> > > >> (such
> > > >> > > as
> > > >> > > > > > > > Solidfire,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > NetApp etc :) ) and software such as Veeam,
> > Commvault
> > > >> etc
> > > >> > to
> > > >> > > > > > > accelerate
> > > >> > > > > > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > process.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > [image: ShapeBlue] <http://www.shapeblue.com>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > Paul Angus
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > VP Technology ,  ShapeBlue
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > d:  *+44 203 617 0528 | s: +44 203 603 0540*
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > <+44%20203%20617%200528%20%7C%20s:%20+44%20203%20603%200540>  |
> > > >> > > > > m:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > *+44 7711 418784* <+44%207711%20418784>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > e:  *paul.angus@shapeblue.com <javascript:;>
> > > >> > <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > |
> > > >> > > > > t: @cloudyangus*
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > <paul.angus@shapeblue.com <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > <javascript:;>%20%7C%20t:%20@cloudyangus>
> > > >> > > > > > |  w:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > *www.shapeblue.com* <http://www.shapeblue.com>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > a:  53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden London WC2N
> 4HS
> > UK
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > Shape Blue Ltd is a company incorporated in
> England
> > &
> > > >> > Wales.
> > > >> > > > > > > ShapeBlue
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > Services India LLP is a company incorporated in
> > India
> > > >> and
> > > >> > is
> > > >> > > > > > operated
> > > >> > > > > > > > > under
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > license from Shape Blue Ltd. Shape Blue Brasil
> > > >> Consultoria
> > > >> > > Ltda
> > > >> > > > > is
> > > >> > > > > > a
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > company incorporated in Brasil and is operated
> under
> > > >> > license
> > > >> > > > from
> > > >> > > > > > > Shape
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue SA Pty Ltd is a company
> > registered
> > > >> by
> > > >> > The
> > > >> > > > > > > Republic
> > > >> > > > > > > > of
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > South Africa and is traded under license from
> Shape
> > > Blue
> > > >> > Ltd.
> > > >> > > > > > > ShapeBlue
> > > >> > > > > > > > > is
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > a registered trademark.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > This email and any attachments to it may be
> > > confidential
> > > >> > and
> > > >> > > > are
> > > >> > > > > > > > intended
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > solely for the use of the individual to whom it is
> > > >> > addressed.
> > > >> > > > Any
> > > >> > > > > > > views
> > > >> > > > > > > > > or
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > opinions expressed are solely those of the author
> > and
> > > do
> > > >> > not
> > > >> > > > > > > > necessarily
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or related
> > > companies.
> > > >> If
> > > >> > > you
> > > >> > > > > are
> > > >> > > > > > > not
> > > >> > > > > > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > intended recipient of this email, you must neither
> > > take
> > > >> any
> > > >> > > > > action
> > > >> > > > > > > > based
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > upon its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone.
> > > Please
> > > >> > > > contact
> > > >> > > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > sender
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > if you believe you have received this email in
> > error.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > From: Syed Mushtaq [mailto:
> syed1.mushtaq@gmail.com
> > > >> > > > > <javascript:;> <javascript:;>]
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, February 5, 2016 4:58 PM
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org <javascript:;>
> > > >> > <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Propose][New Feature] Storage
> > Snapshots
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > Paul,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > When you say actual backups, how would it be
> > different
> > > >> from
> > > >> > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > Volume
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > Snapshots that exist currently. My understanding
> is
> > > that
> > > >> > > > Backups
> > > >> > > > > > end
> > > >> > > > > > > up
> > > >> > > > > > > > > in
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > Sec Storage whereas Snapshots are just a
> > point-in-time
> > > >> > state
> > > >> > > of
> > > >> > > > > > your
> > > >> > > > > > > > > volume
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > which can be restored back correct?
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > -Syed
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Paul Angus <
> > > >> > > > > > > paul.angus@shapeblue.com <javascript:;> <javascript:;>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Hi Syed,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > As I understand it, the SolidFire plugin will
> > export
> > > >> the
> > > >> > > > > snapshot
> > > >> > > > > > > to
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > secondary storage if the user requests a
> template
> > > from
> > > >> > the
> > > >> > > > > > snapshot
> > > >> > > > > > > > or
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > wants to download the snapshot from the cloud.
> > This
> > > >> is a
> > > >> > > > good,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > pragmatic approach and yes Mike the SolidFire
> > > storage
> > > >> is
> > > >> > > > super
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > reliable and snapshots on SolidFire arrays take
> up
> > > >> next
> > > >> > to
> > > >> > > no
> > > >> > > > > > > space.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > BUT I think that we are talking about a more
> > general
> > > >> > > purpose
> > > >> > > > > API,
> > > >> > > > > > > and
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > other storage systems may not be as awesome as
> > > Mike's.
> > > >> > > That's
> > > >> > > > > my
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > concern. Also, the time to transfer for say 1TB
> to
> > > >> move
> > > >> > > from
> > > >> > > > > > > primary
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > to sec storage and then create a VM template out
> > of
> > > it
> > > >> > may
> > > >> > > be
> > > >> > > > > too
> > > >> > > > > > > > long
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > for users.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > @Mike I don’t think 'we' use the term volume
> > > snapshot
> > > >> for
> > > >> > > > > backup,
> > > >> > > > > > > > it's
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > just that users want to do backups and a volume
> > > >> snapshot
> > > >> > is
> > > >> > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > only
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > type of snapshot that copies the disk elsewhere
> > and
> > > >> can
> > > >> > be
> > > >> > > > > > > scheduled.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > I'm 'pondering' the implications of enabling
> > actual
> > > >> > backups
> > > >> > > > > > > (through
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > recognised backup providers) and the user
> > > requirements
> > > >> > > around
> > > >> > > > > > them
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > (particularly restoration use cases) as a
> separate
> > > >> thread
> > > >> > > of
> > > >> > > > > > work.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > [image: ShapeBlue] <http://www.shapeblue.com>
> > Paul
> > > >> Angus
> > > >> > > VP
> > > >> > > > > > > > Technology
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > , ShapeBlue
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > d: *+44 203 617 0528 | s: +44 203 603 0540*
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > <+44%20203%20617%200528%20%7C%20s:%20+44%20203%20603%200540>
> > > >> > > > |
> > > >> > > > > m:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > *+44 7711 418784* <+44%207711%20418784>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > e: *paul.angus@shapeblue.com <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > <javascript:;> |
> > > >> > > > > t: @cloudyangus*
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > <paul.angus@shapeblue.com <javascript:;>
> > > >> <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > > %20%7C%20t:%20@cloudyangus> | w:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > *www.shapeblue.com* <http://www.shapeblue.com>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > a: 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden London WC2N
> 4HS
> > > UK
> > > >> > Shape
> > > >> > > > > Blue
> > > >> > > > > > > Ltd
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > is a company incorporated in England & Wales.
> > > >> ShapeBlue
> > > >> > > > > Services
> > > >> > > > > > > > India
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > LLP is a company incorporated in India and is
> > > operated
> > > >> > > under
> > > >> > > > > > > license
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > from Shape Blue Ltd. Shape Blue Brasil
> Consultoria
> > > >> Ltda
> > > >> > is
> > > >> > > a
> > > >> > > > > > > company
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > incorporated in Brasil and is operated under
> > license
> > > >> from
> > > >> > > > Shape
> > > >> > > > > > > Blue
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Ltd. ShapeBlue SA Pty Ltd is a company
> registered
> > by
> > > >> The
> > > >> > > > > Republic
> > > >> > > > > > > of
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > South Africa and is traded under license from
> > Shape
> > > >> Blue
> > > >> > > Ltd.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > ShapeBlue is a registered trademark.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > This email and any attachments to it may be
> > > >> confidential
> > > >> > > and
> > > >> > > > > are
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > intended solely for the use of the individual to
> > > whom
> > > >> it
> > > >> > is
> > > >> > > > > > > > addressed.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Any views or opinions expressed are solely those
> > of
> > > >> the
> > > >> > > > author
> > > >> > > > > > and
> > > >> > > > > > > do
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > not necessarily represent those of Shape Blue
> Ltd
> > or
> > > >> > > related
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > companies. If you are not the intended recipient
> > of
> > > >> this
> > > >> > > > email,
> > > >> > > > > > you
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > must neither take any action based upon its
> > > contents,
> > > >> nor
> > > >> > > > copy
> > > >> > > > > or
> > > >> > > > > > > > show
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you
> > > believe
> > > >> > you
> > > >> > > > have
> > > >> > > > > > > > > received
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > this email in error.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > From: Syed Mushtaq [mailto:
> > syed1.mushtaq@gmail.com
> > > >> > > > > <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > > <javascript:;>]
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Sent: 05 February 2016 15:31
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Propose][New Feature] Storage
> > > Snapshots
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > I think the terminology confusion comes from AWS
> > > where
> > > >> > they
> > > >> > > > do
> > > >> > > > > > EBS
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > snapshots backed up to S3 and CloudStack sort of
> > > >> followed
> > > >> > > > that.
> > > >> > > > > > And
> > > >> > > > > > > > as
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > an end user who is oblivious to the internals of
> > my
> > > >> > > provider,
> > > >> > > > > my
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > expectation would be something similar to what
> AWS
> > > as
> > > >> > that
> > > >> > > is
> > > >> > > > > my
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > biggest reference point.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > To your point Mike, I agree that a Primary
> Storage
> > > >> > failure
> > > >> > > on
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > SolidFire is unlikely, there are other
> motivations
> > > >> for us
> > > >> > > to
> > > >> > > > > push
> > > >> > > > > > > > data
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > to secondary storage. Primary storage (atleast
> for
> > > us)
> > > >> > > costs
> > > >> > > > > > > around 3
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > times as much as secondary storage and snapshots
> > on
> > > >> > primary
> > > >> > > > > > storage
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > are rarely used (especially for some of our
> > > customers
> > > >> who
> > > >> > > do
> > > >> > > > > > daily
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > backups).
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 10:18 AM, Mike Tutkowski
> <
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > <javascript:;>>
> > > >> > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Some of the weirdness is around terminology.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > For most systems I've worked on, a snapshot
> and
> > a
> > > >> > backup
> > > >> > > > are
> > > >> > > > > > two
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > completely different things (but CloudStack
> has
> > > >> > > > traditionally
> > > >> > > > > > > used
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > the term "volume snapshot" to mean backup).
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > I will put in a SolidFire "plug" here and say,
> > > >> though,
> > > >> > > that
> > > >> > > > > if
> > > >> > > > > > > your
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > primary storage is running on SolidFire that
> it
> > is
> > > >> > > unlikely
> > > >> > > > > > > you'll
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > encounter an issue where your primary storage
> > goes
> > > >> > > offline
> > > >> > > > > (and
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > you'll even maintain your performance
> guarantees
> > > >> during
> > > >> > > > > failure
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > scenarios and upgrades, as well). That being
> the
> > > >> case,
> > > >> > it
> > > >> > > > is
> > > >> > > > > > less
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > useful to require a backup to Swift (but it's
> > > >> perfectly
> > > >> > > OK
> > > >> > > > if
> > > >> > > > > > > > that's
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > what we want to do
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > here).
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 8:07 AM, Syed Mushtaq
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > <syed1.mushtaq@gmail.com <javascript:;>
> > > >> > <javascript:;>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Paul,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > I believe with the current implementation of
> > > >> > Snapshots
> > > >> > > on
> > > >> > > > > > > managed
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > storage
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > (SolidFire) the snapshots are never exported
> > to
> > > >> the
> > > >> > > > > secondary
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > storage.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > While this solves the problem of having
> > > snapshots
> > > >> > > taking
> > > >> > > > > > > forever
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > to get to sec storage, this leaves us with a
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > huge
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > liability if our primary storage goes down.
> We
> > > see
> > > >> > > > > snapshots
> > > >> > > > > > as
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > our recovery path because we store them in
> > Swift
> > > >> > which
> > > >> > > is
> > > >> > > > > > > > reliable
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > and resilient to failures.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > With Storage snpashots our goal is to have
> > > Volume
> > > >> > > > snapshots
> > > >> > > > > > > > always
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > backed up to secondary storage and Storage
> > > >> Snapshots
> > > >> > > stay
> > > >> > > > > on
> > > >> > > > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > primary
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > storage.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > A provider could potentially mix both these
> > and
> > > >> solve
> > > >> > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > problem
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > that you mentioned where you want to meet
> > user's
> > > >> > > > > expectation
> > > >> > > > > > > of a
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > snapshot (ie backup to sec storage) while
> > having
> > > >> an
> > > >> > > > ability
> > > >> > > > > > to
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > utilize faster sanpshots (i.e. on the
> device)
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Hope this clarifies things.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -Syed
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Paul Angus
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > <paul.angus@shapeblue.com <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > <javascript:;>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > HI guys,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Could someone point me to the Jira bug of
> FS
> > > for
> > > >> > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > SAN-snapshot
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > feature
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > in 4.6 which is mentioned.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > From my discussions with users and
> operators
> > > >> around
> > > >> > > > > > snapshots
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'd make
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > following observations:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > a. 'users' use snapshots as backups (both
> > > >> long-term
> > > >> > > and
> > > >> > > > > > short
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > term)
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > with
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > the expectation that they can use them for
> > > >> recovery
> > > >> > > if
> > > >> > > > > > > > required.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > b. operators fall back to snapshots if
> > > something
> > > >> > has
> > > >> > > > gone
> > > >> > > > > > > wrong
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > with primary storage.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > c. users sometimes want to be able to
> export
> > > >> > > snapshots
> > > >> > > > as
> > > >> > > > > > > well
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > as
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > create
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > new VMs from their snapshots
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > d. snapshots are a currently a massive
> pain
> > > for
> > > >> > > > > operators,
> > > >> > > > > > I
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > know at
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > least
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > one public cloud who have snapshots which
> > > take 2
> > > >> > days
> > > >> > > > to
> > > >> > > > > > > > > complete.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > e. snapshots (as they are) can't be used
> for
> > > >> > multiple
> > > >> > > > LVM
> > > >> > > > > > > > disks.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think the process Mike has used in the
> > > >> SolidFire
> > > >> > > > plugin
> > > >> > > > > > > (only
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > moving
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > disk image to secondary storage when you
> > > >> absolutely
> > > >> > > > have
> > > >> > > > > > to)
> > > >> > > > > > > is
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > a very
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > good
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > and pragmatic solution. I wonder what
> > problems
> > > >> an
> > > >> > > > > operator
> > > >> > > > > > > > might
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > experience
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > if they have an issue with a given primary
> > > >> storage
> > > >> > > pool
> > > >> > > > > in
> > > >> > > > > > a
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > cluster.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > (I
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > know that that is REALLY unlikely in the
> > > >> SolidFire
> > > >> > > case
> > > >> > > > > > Mike
> > > >> > > > > > > :)
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > ) And
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > if
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > the transfer from primary to secondary is
> > > slow,
> > > >> the
> > > >> > > > time
> > > >> > > > > to
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > being able
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > to
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > create a template or export the volume
> will
> > be
> > > >> > slow.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > So for me the issue is around making sure
> > that
> > > >> the
> > > >> > > end
> > > >> > > > > > users
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > expectations
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > are met (while improving the
> > speed/efficiency
> > > of
> > > >> > the
> > > >> > > > back
> > > >> > > > > > > end)
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > [image: ShapeBlue] <
> > http://www.shapeblue.com>
> > > >> Paul
> > > >> > > > Angus
> > > >> > > > > > VP
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Technology , ShapeBlue
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > d: *+44 203 617 0528 | s: +44 203 603
> 0540*
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > >
> <+44%20203%20617%200528%20%7C%20s:%20+44%20203%20603%200540>
> > > >> > > > > > > |
> > > >> > > > > > > > m:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > *+44 7711 418784* <+44%207711%20418784>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > e: *paul.angus@shapeblue.com
> <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > <javascript:;> | t:
> > > >> > > > > > @cloudyangus*
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <paul.angus@shapeblue.com <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > > %20%7C%20t:%20@cloudyangus> | w:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > *www.shapeblue.com* <
> > http://www.shapeblue.com
> > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > a: 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden London
> > WC2N
> > > >> 4HS
> > > >> > UK
> > > >> > > > > Shape
> > > >> > > > > > > > Blue
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ltd is a company incorporated in England &
> > > >> Wales.
> > > >> > > > > ShapeBlue
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Services India LLP is a company
> incorporated
> > > in
> > > >> > India
> > > >> > > > and
> > > >> > > > > > is
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > operated
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > under
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > license from Shape Blue Ltd. Shape Blue
> > Brasil
> > > >> > > > > Consultoria
> > > >> > > > > > > Ltda
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > is a company incorporated in Brasil and is
> > > >> operated
> > > >> > > > under
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue SA
> > Pty
> > > >> Ltd
> > > >> > is
> > > >> > > a
> > > >> > > > > > > company
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > registered by The Republic
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > of
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > South Africa and is traded under license
> > from
> > > >> Shape
> > > >> > > > Blue
> > > >> > > > > > Ltd.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > ShapeBlue
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > is
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > a registered trademark.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > This email and any attachments to it may
> be
> > > >> > > > confidential
> > > >> > > > > > and
> > > >> > > > > > > > are
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > intended
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > solely for the use of the individual to
> whom
> > > it
> > > >> is
> > > >> > > > > > addressed.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any views
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > or
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > opinions expressed are solely those of the
> > > >> author
> > > >> > and
> > > >> > > > do
> > > >> > > > > > not
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > necessarily
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or
> related
> > > >> > > companies.
> > > >> > > > > If
> > > >> > > > > > > you
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > are not
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > intended recipient of this email, you must
> > > >> neither
> > > >> > > take
> > > >> > > > > any
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > action
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > based
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > upon its contents, nor copy or show it to
> > > >> anyone.
> > > >> > > > Please
> > > >> > > > > > > > contact
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > sender
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > if you believe you have received this
> email
> > in
> > > >> > error.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Pierre-Luc Dion [mailto:
> > > >> pdion@cloudops.com
> > > >> > > > > <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > > <javascript:;>]
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, February 5, 2016 12:56 PM
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Propose][New Feature]
> Storage
> > > >> > Snapshots
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Mike,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > The idea of introducing a new API:
> > > >> StorageSnapshot
> > > >> > > for
> > > >> > > > > > > managed
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > storage
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > is
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > because the VolumeSnapshot default, or
> > > expected,
> > > >> > > > behavior
> > > >> > > > > > is
> > > >> > > > > > > to
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > archive snapshots into the Secondary
> > Storage.
> > > >> So a
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > StorageSnapshot API would be
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > for
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > snapshot that remain on the managed
> storage
> > > >> > > appliance.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quickly looking at the API doc and I don't
> > > see a
> > > >> > > strong
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > requirement for volume snapshots to be
> moved
> > > >> into
> > > >> > > > > secondary
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > storage. So, maybe StorageSnapshot API is
> > not
> > > >> > useful,
> > > >> > > > but
> > > >> > > > > > > both
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > use cases are required. A snapshot that
> > remain
> > > >> on
> > > >> > the
> > > >> > > > > > managed
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > storage, and another type of
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > snapshot
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > that end up into the secondary storage.
> > Since
> > > >> > you've
> > > >> > > > > done a
> > > >> > > > > > > lot
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > of
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > work,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > might easier to just add a parameter to
> the
> > > >> current
> > > >> > > > > > snapshot
> > > >> > > > > > > > API
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > that
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > would
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > trigger an extraction of the storage
> > snapshot
> > > >> into
> > > >> > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > secondary
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > storage?
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > PL
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 9:02 PM, Mike
> > > Tutkowski <
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
> <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think that all sounds reasonable then
> -
> > > >> thanks!
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 6:52 PM, Syed
> > > Mushtaq <
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > syed1.mushtaq@gmail.com <javascript:;>
> > > >> <javascript:;>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> You are correct Mike in terms of the
> > > >> > requirements.
> > > >> > > > One
> > > >> > > > > > of
> > > >> > > > > > > > our
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > earlier
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> iterations on this was to have an
> > argument
> > > to
> > > >> > the
> > > >> > > > > create
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> snapshot
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > API
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> which decides whether to backup the
> > volume
> > > to
> > > >> > sec
> > > >> > > > > > storage
> > > >> > > > > > > > but
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> we realized it would make management of
> > > >> > snapshots
> > > >> > > > > quite
> > > >> > > > > > > > messy
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> so we proposed a new api instead.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016, 8:29 PM Mike
> > Tutkowski
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
> > > <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > <javascript:;>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Hi,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Just to make sure I understand all the
> > > >> > > requirements
> > > >> > > > > > here:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> 1) This relates only to managed
> storage
> > > (1:1
> > > >> > > > mapping
> > > >> > > > > > > > between
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> a virtual disk and a backend SAN
> > volume).
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> 2) We want to take the current
> > (introduced
> > > >> in
> > > >> > > 4.6)
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> functionality, which creates a
> snapshot
> > on
> > > >> the
> > > >> > > SAN,
> > > >> > > > > and
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> extend it via a config option (or
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> something) to not only take the SAN
> > > >> snapshot,
> > > >> > but
> > > >> > > > to
> > > >> > > > > > copy
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> the underlying VHD (XenServer only) to
> > > NFS.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> 3) The SAN snapshot is always taken.
> > It's
> > > >> the
> > > >> > > > backup
> > > >> > > > > to
> > > >> > > > > > > NFS
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> that is optional.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> 4) Templates can be created from the
> > > >> snapshot
> > > >> > > > that's
> > > >> > > > > on
> > > >> > > > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> SAN (already works).
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> 5) CloudStack volumes can be created
> > from
> > > >> the
> > > >> > > > > snapshot
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> that's on
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> SAN (already works as long as the new
> > > >> > CloudStack
> > > >> > > > > volume
> > > >> > > > > > > > ends
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> up on the same primary storage).
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Would we have a need for a storage
> > > snapshot
> > > >> API
> > > >> > > > then
> > > >> > > > > or
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> would that just be the standard volume
> > > >> snapshot
> > > >> > > > > without
> > > >> > > > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> backup to
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > NFS?
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Thanks!
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Mike
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 5:24 PM, Syed
> > > Mushtaq
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> <syed1.mushtaq@gmail.com
> <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > <javascript:;>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> Is it possible to have both
> > > functionalities
> > > >> > > > > (snapshot
> > > >> > > > > > on
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> SAN & Sec
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> Storage) coexist? Because Ideally, we
> > > would
> > > >> > like
> > > >> > > > to
> > > >> > > > > > have
> > > >> > > > > > > > > both.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> For example, some of our customers
> want
> > > to
> > > >> > > > implement
> > > >> > > > > > > their
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> own backup strategies and do
> encryption
> > > to
> > > >> > their
> > > >> > > > > > backups
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> which is a perfect use case for
> Storage
> > > >> > Snapshot
> > > >> > > > > while
> > > >> > > > > > > our
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> other customers will still keep using
> > the
> > > >> > > standard
> > > >> > > > > > > volume
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > snapshot.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> To keep things backward compatible,
> we
> > > can
> > > >> > add a
> > > >> > > > > > setting
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> which
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > says
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> to not upload on secondary storage,
> > > >> because,
> > > >> > > after
> > > >> > > > > > all,
> > > >> > > > > > > > you
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> would take a SAN snapshot first when
> > > doing
> > > >> a
> > > >> > > > Volume
> > > >> > > > > > > > > Snapshot.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> You could stop the process there and
> > not
> > > do
> > > >> > the
> > > >> > > > > > upload.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> What do you think about this
> approach?
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> Thanks,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> -Syed
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 4:25 PM, Mike
> > > >> > Tutkowski <
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
> > > >> <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> So, this is just me thinking out
> load
> > > >> here,
> > > >> > but
> > > >> > > > if
> > > >> > > > > a
> > > >> > > > > > > > given
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> CloudStack cloud doesn't actually
> need
> > > to
> > > >> > > provide
> > > >> > > > > > both
> > > >> > > > > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > ability
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> to take a SAN snapshot and export it
> > to
> > > >> NFS
> > > >> > (if
> > > >> > > > > just
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> taking a SAN snapshot is OK), then
> we
> > > >> might
> > > >> > be
> > > >> > > > able
> > > >> > > > > > to
> > > >> > > > > > > > get
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> away with no new
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > API
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> calls and simply implement a new
> > custom
> > > >> > > snapshot
> > > >> > > > > > > strategy
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> and
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > data
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> motion strategy to handle the case
> > where
> > > >> the
> > > >> > > > > > CloudStack
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> cloud
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > does
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> want both a SAN snapshot and
> > > >> exported-to-NFS
> > > >> > > > > backup.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> In other words, the "default"
> behavior
> > > >> would
> > > >> > be
> > > >> > > > to
> > > >> > > > > > use
> > > >> > > > > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> snapshot strategy and data motion
> > > strategy
> > > >> > that
> > > >> > > > we
> > > >> > > > > > > > already
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> have (the one that only takes a SAN
> > > >> > snapshot).
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> If your CloudStack cloud, however,
> > wants
> > > >> to
> > > >> > > take
> > > >> > > > a
> > > >> > > > > > SAN
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> snapshot and have the data exported
> to
> > > >> NFS,
> > > >> > > then
> > > >> > > > we
> > > >> > > > > > > could
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> have you manipulate a Swing config
> > file
> > > to
> > > >> > make
> > > >> > > > use
> > > >> > > > > > of
> > > >> > > > > > > a
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> new snapshot strategy and data
> motion
> > > >> > strategy
> > > >> > > > that
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> performs both of these
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > activities.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> This way, the old behavior is still
> > the
> > > >> > default
> > > >> > > > for
> > > >> > > > > > > > users,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> but CloudStack admins can change
> this
> > > >> > behavior
> > > >> > > > via
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > configuration.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> Thoughts?
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 11:55 AM,
> Mike
> > > >> > > Tutkowski <
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
> > > >> <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Right...I think we will need to
> come
> > up
> > > >> > with a
> > > >> > > > > > viable
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> upgrade path or some reasonable way
> > for
> > > >> them
> > > >> > > to
> > > >> > > > > move
> > > >> > > > > > > > from
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> the old way to the new way (and
> some
> > > >> obvious
> > > >> > > way
> > > >> > > > > > that
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> they will know they need
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > to
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > do this).
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 11:45 AM,
> Syed
> > > >> > Mushtaq
> > > >> > > <
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> syed1.mushtaq@gmail.com
> > <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> I'm not really sure about the
> > upgrade
> > > >> path
> > > >> > > > > however,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> customers who are using 4.6 and
> are
> > > on a
> > > >> > > > managed
> > > >> > > > > > > > storage
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> would no longer have the same
> > > >> functionality
> > > >> > > > with
> > > >> > > > > > > Volume
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Snapshots.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 1:43 PM,
> Syed
> > > >> > Mushtaq
> > > >> > > <
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> syed1.mushtaq@gmail.com
> > > <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> So if I understand correctly,
> > > currently
> > > >> > > > taking a
> > > >> > > > > > > > Volume
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> Snapshots of a volume on a
> managed
> > > >> storage
> > > >> > > > keeps
> > > >> > > > > > it
> > > >> > > > > > > on
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> the storage array. As a part of
> > this
> > > >> > > feature,
> > > >> > > > we
> > > >> > > > > > can
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> make sure
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > that
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> Volume Snapshots on managed
> storage
> > > are
> > > >> > > > uploaded
> > > >> > > > > > to
> > > >> > > > > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> secondary storage. This would
> make
> > > the
> > > >> > > Volume
> > > >> > > > > > > Snapshot
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> feature behave the same
> regardless
> > of
> > > >> the
> > > >> > > > > storage
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> (managed or
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> non-managed) And, for utilizing
> the
> > > >> > > efficient
> > > >> > > > > > > backend
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> storage
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > capabilities, we can use the new storage
> > > >> snapshots
> > > >> > > API.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 1:36 PM,
> > Mike
> > > >> > > > Tutkowski <
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
> > > >> > <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > <javascript:;>>
> > > >> > > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Hi everyone,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Whatever we do here, we need to
> > > have a
> > > >> > plan
> > > >> > > > to
> > > >> > > > > > deal
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> with the fact that we already
> > have a
> > > >> > > feature
> > > >> > > > > (in
> > > >> > > > > > > 4.6
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> and
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> later) that allows you to use
> the
> > > >> > existing
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> volume-snapshot APIs to create a
> > > >> volume
> > > >> > > > > snapshot
> > > >> > > > > > > (for
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> managed
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> storage) that resides on a
> backend
> > > SAN
> > > >> > > > (using a
> > > >> > > > > > > > custom
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> snapshot strategy and a custom
> > data
> > > >> > motion
> > > >> > > > > > > strategy).
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> If these new APIs go in, then
> how
> > > >> should
> > > >> > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > original
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> implementation (present in 4.6
> and
> > > >> later)
> > > >> > > be
> > > >> > > > > > > changed?
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> If it
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > is
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> changed, how do we support
> > customers
> > > >> who
> > > >> > > are
> > > >> > > > > > > already
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> using
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> original volume-snapshot API to
> > take
> > > >> > > > snapshots
> > > >> > > > > > on a
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> backend
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > SAN?
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Mike
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 11:27 AM,
> > > Will
> > > >> > > > Stevens <
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> wstevens@cloudops.com
> > > <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Will you be able to create a
> > > Template
> > > >> > > from a
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > StorageSnapshot?
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> If yes, will the template be
> > stored
> > > >> in
> > > >> > the
> > > >> > > > > > > secondary
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> storage like normal templates
> or
> > > will
> > > >> > that
> > > >> > > > be
> > > >> > > > > > > > handled
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> somehow on the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > vendor side?
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> *Will STEVENS*
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Lead Developer
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions
> > > >> Experts
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|*
> > Quebec
> > > >> *|*
> > > >> > > H3J
> > > >> > > > > 1S6
> > > >> > > > > > w
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 1:22 PM,
> > > Syed
> > > >> > > > Mushtaq <
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> syed1.mushtaq@gmail.com
> > > >> <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Will!!!
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 1:19
> PM,
> > > Will
> > > >> > > > Stevens
> > > >> > > > > <
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> wstevens@cloudops.com
> > > >> <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> I explicitly linked the
> Design
> > > >> Spec in
> > > >> > > the
> > > >> > > > > > Jira
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> ticket because it was not
> clear
> > > in
> > > >> the
> > > >> > > > > > 'mention'
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> section because it shows as a
> > > page
> > > >> > 'you
> > > >> > > do
> > > >> > > > > not
> > > >> > > > > > > > have
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > permission to'.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> *Will STEVENS*
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Lead Developer
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud
> Solutions
> > > >> Experts
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|*
> > > Quebec
> > > >> > *|*
> > > >> > > > H3J
> > > >> > > > > > 1S6
> > > >> > > > > > > w
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> cloudops.com *|* tw
> @CloudOps_
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 1:02
> PM,
> > > >> Syed
> > > >> > > Ahmed
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <sahmed@cloudops.com
> > > >> <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Design Spec:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Sto
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> rageSnapshot++API
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Jira Ticket
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 27
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 8
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi All,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> We plan to propose a new set
> > of
> > > >> APIs
> > > >> > to
> > > >> > > > do
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> snapshots on managed storage
> > > >> backends
> > > >> > > > like
> > > >> > > > > > > > > SolidFire.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Snapshots on current managed
> > > >> storage
> > > >> > > stay
> > > >> > > > > on
> > > >> > > > > > > the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> device which is contrary to
> > what
> > > >> > > > CloudStack
> > > >> > > > > > > calls
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > snpshots.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> But taking snapshots on
> > storage
> > > >> and
> > > >> > > > keeping
> > > >> > > > > > it
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> there has its own advantages
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > and
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> we would ideally like to
> have
> > > both
> > > >> > ways
> > > >> > > > of
> > > >> > > > > > > doing
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> snapshots. This proposal
> adds
> > 4
> > > >> new
> > > >> > > APIs
> > > >> > > > to
> > > >> > > > > > > > create
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> snapshots on backend
> storage.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you guys think of
> this
> > > >> > > feature? I
> > > >> > > > > > would
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> love to have some feedback.
> I
> > am
> > > >> > > working
> > > >> > > > on
> > > >> > > > > > > > making
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> the design
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > spec
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> more concrete but wanted to
> > > have a
> > > >> > high
> > > >> > > > > level
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> feedback first before
> starting
> > > to
> > > >> > work
> > > >> > > on
> > > >> > > > > it.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> -Syed
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> --
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> *Mike Tutkowski*
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> *Senior CloudStack Developer,
> > > >> SolidFire
> > > >> > > Inc.*
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
> > > >> > > > <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> o: 303.746.7302
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Advancing the way the world uses
> > the
> > > >> > cloud
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> <
> > > >> > > > > > > http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play
> > > >> > > > > > > > >*™
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> *
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> --
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> *Mike Tutkowski*
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> *Senior CloudStack Developer,
> > SolidFire
> > > >> > Inc.*
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
> > > >> > > <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> o: 303.746.7302
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Advancing the way the world uses
> the
> > > >> cloud
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> <
> > > >> > > > > http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play
> > > >> > > > > > > >*™*
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> --
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> *Mike Tutkowski*
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> *Senior CloudStack Developer,
> > SolidFire
> > > >> Inc.*
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
> > > >> > <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> o: 303.746.7302
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> Advancing the way the world uses the
> > > cloud
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> <
> > > >> > > > > http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play
> > > >> > > > > > > >*™*
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> --
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> *Mike Tutkowski*
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> *Senior CloudStack Developer,
> SolidFire
> > > >> Inc.*
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
> > > >> <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> o: 303.746.7302
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Advancing the way the world uses the
> > cloud
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> <
> > > >> > > > http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play
> > > >> > > > > > >*™*
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *Mike Tutkowski*
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire
> > > Inc.*
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
> > > >> <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > o: 303.746.7302
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Advancing the way the world uses the
> cloud
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <
> > > >> > > http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play
> > > >> > > > > >*™*
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Find out more about ShapeBlue and our
> range
> > of
> > > >> > > > CloudStack
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > related
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > services:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > IaaS Cloud Design & Build
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <
> > > >> > http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//>
> > > >> > > |
> > > >> > > > > > > > CSForge –
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > rapid IaaS deployment framework <
> > > >> > > > > > > http://shapeblue.com/csforge/
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > CloudStack Consulting
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <
> > http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/
> > > >
> > > >> |
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > CloudStack
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Software Engineering
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <
> > > >> > > http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > CloudStack Infrastructure Support
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <
> > > >> > > > http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > |
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courses
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <
> http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > *Mike Tutkowski*
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
> <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > o: 303.746.7302
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > <
> > > http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play
> > > >> > >*™*
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of
> > > >> CloudStack
> > > >> > > > > related
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > services:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > IaaS Cloud Design & Build
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > <
> > http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//
> > > >
> > > >> |
> > > >> > > > > CSForge –
> > > >> > > > > > > > rapid
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > IaaS deployment framework <
> > > >> http://shapeblue.com/csforge/
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > > > > CloudStack
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Consulting <
> > > >> http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > |
> > > >> > > > > > > > CloudStack
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Software Engineering
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > <
> > > >> http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > CloudStack Infrastructure Support
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > <
> > > >> http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > |
> > > >> > > > > > > > CloudStack
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Bootcamp Training Courses <
> > > >> > > > > > > http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of
> > > >> CloudStack
> > > >> > > > related
> > > >> > > > > > > > > services:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > IaaS Cloud Design & Build
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > <
> http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//
> > >
> > > |
> > > >> > > > CSForge –
> > > >> > > > > > > rapid
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > IaaS deployment framework <
> > > >> http://shapeblue.com/csforge/>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > CloudStack Consulting <
> > > >> > > > > > http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/>
> > > >> > > > > > > |
> > > >> > > > > > > > > CloudStack
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > Software Engineering
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > <
> > > http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > CloudStack Infrastructure Support
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > <
> > > >> http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/>
> > > >> > |
> > > >> > > > > > > CloudStack
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > Bootcamp Training Courses <
> > > >> > > > > > http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > --
> > > >> > > > > > > *Mike Tutkowski*
> > > >> > > > > > > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
> > > >> > > > > > > e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com <javascript:;>
> > > <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > > > o: 303.746.7302
> > > >> > > > > > > Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
> > > >> > > > > > > <http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™*
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > --
> > > >> > > > > *Mike Tutkowski*
> > > >> > > > > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
> > > >> > > > > e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com <javascript:;>
> > > >> > > > > o: 303.746.7302
> > > >> > > > > Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
> > > >> > > > > <http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™*
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > --
> > > >> > > > Ian Rae
> > > >> > > > CEO | PDG
> > > >> > > > c: 514.944.4008
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > CloudOps | Cloud Infrastructure and Networking Solutions
> > > >> > > > www.cloudops.com | 420 rue Guy | Montreal | Canada | H3J 1S6
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > --
> > > >> > *Mike Tutkowski*
> > > >> > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
> > > >> > e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
> > > >> > o: 303.746.7302
> > > >> > Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
> > > >> > <http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™*
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > *Mike Tutkowski*
> > > > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
> > > > e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
> > > > o: 303.746.7302
> > > > Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
> > > > <http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™*
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > *Mike Tutkowski*
> > > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
> > > e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
> > > o: 303.746.7302
> > > Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
> > > <http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™*
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> *Mike Tutkowski*
> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
> e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
> o: 303.746.7302
> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
> <http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™*
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message