cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Syed Mushtaq <syed1.mush...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Propose][New Feature] Storage Snapshots
Date Fri, 12 Feb 2016 17:04:12 GMT
Correct. Keeping the snapshot on managed storage should be the default
behaviour as it will not break backward compatibility.

-Syed


On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:

> I think so.
>
> Just to confirm: The default behavior for a volume snapshot with managed
> storage is equivalent to a storage snapshot.
>
> When the global setting value is changed, the data ends up on secondary
> storage (NFS).
>
> Is that accurate?
>
> On Friday, February 12, 2016, Syed Mushtaq <syed1.mushtaq@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > > Situation: Global setting value is changed to a non-default value.
> > >
> > > 2) Action: Volume snapshot is taken with managed storage. Result: ???
> I'm
> > > not sure which scenario we're looking at here now.
> > >
> >
> > In this situation, volume snapshots will end up on secondary storage and
> > the snapshot on the managed storage will be deleted.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > 3) Action: Storage snapshot is taken with managed storage. Result: ???
> > I'm
> > > not sure which scenario we're looking at here now.
> > >
> >
> > In this situation, the snapshot stays on the managed storage.
> >
> > Does this answer your question Mike?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 11:43 AM, Mike Tutkowski <
> > mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Syed,
> > >
> > > Can you clarify how you see these behaviors (below) working now that we
> > are
> > > considering a global settings value applicable to managed storage with
> > > volume snapshots?
> > >
> > > State: Global setting value defaults to keep snapshot on storage system
> > > (primary storage) for managed storage.
> > >
> > > 1) Action: Volume snapshot is taken with managed storage. Result:
> > Snapshot
> > > is taken and kept on storage system (primary storage). (This is what
> you
> > > and I have been working on for a couple months now.)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > > Mike
> > >
> > > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 9:15 AM, Syed Mushtaq <syed1.mushtaq@gmail.com
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I agree with Mike's concern about backward compatibility. We can add
> a
> > > > global flag which makes sure that the way volume snapshots work
> > currently
> > > > on managed storage (stay on the device) is retained after upgrade. We
> > can
> > > > then safely implement the Storage Snapshot API while making the
> Volume
> > > > Snpashot API move the snapshot to Secondary Storage.
> > > >
> > > > Sounds good guys?
> > > >
> > > > -Syed
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 2:56 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> > > > mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
> > > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Here's what we have for snapshots for managed storage as of 4.6,
> > Paul:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. VM snapshots (no proposed changes to this).
> > > > >
> > > > > 2. Volume snapshots that do not end up on secondary storage, but
> > rather
> > > > are
> > > > > stored on a SAN (effectively storing snapshots on primary storage).
> > > > >
> > > > > Pierre-Luc is saying he'd like this for snapshots for managed
> > storage:
> > > > >
> > > > > A. VM snapshots (no proposed changes to this).
> > > > >
> > > > > B. Volume snapshots that export to secondary storage.
> > > > >
> > > > > C. New: Storage snapshots that behave like 2 (above).
> > > > >
> > > > > I like Pierre-Luc's ideas there, but the problem is backward
> > > > compatibility.
> > > > >
> > > > > If customers who were using managed storage with volume snapshots
> in
> > > 4.6
> > > > > were getting their snapshots put on a SAN, then in 4.9 - all of a
> > > sudden
> > > > -
> > > > > their new snapshots are put on secondary storage (unless they
> > > explicitly
> > > > > change over to using the new Storage snapshots feature).
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 12:32 PM, Paul Angus <
> > paul.angus@shapeblue.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Just to make sure I'm on the same page, are we talking about;
> > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9278 ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The FS reads (to me) more like 1a + the possibility to export to
> > > > > secondary
> > > > > > storage if required?
> > > > > > Have I understood correctly?
> > > > > > I have seen [1a] implemented for VMware by NetApp in their beta
> > > > > CloudStack
> > > > > > plugin (pleased I can say that without Mike beating me up now).
> No
> > > > > changes
> > > > > > to the CloudStack API were required. (nb it didn't export to
> > > secondary
> > > > > > storage).
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. VM Snapshot (point-in-time hypervisor based snapshots)
> > > > > > 1a. SAN assisted VM snapshots (point-in-time hypervisor snapshot
> > > takes
> > > > > > place on transparently SAN to avoid performance issue in disk
> > chains)
> > > > > > 2. SAN Snapshot (Storage Snapshot) - NEW
> > > > > > 3. Volume Snapshot (current old/slow transfer to secstorage)
> > > > > > 4. Backup - JUST AN IDEAL.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [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 | t: @cloudyangus*
> > > > > > <paul.angus@shapeblue.com%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: Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com]
> > > > > > Sent: Monday, February 8, 2016 7:16 PM
> > > > > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [Propose][New Feature] Storage Snapshots
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Correct, Will.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That Global Settings would only be for managed storage.
> Non-managed
> > > > > > (traditional) volume snapshots are completely un-impacted by this
> > > > > feature.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If we need to sometimes keep the snapshots on the SAN and
> sometimes
> > > > push
> > > > > > them to secondary storage, we'll need a more robust solution than
> > > > Global
> > > > > > Settings, though.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 12:11 PM, Will Stevens <
> > wstevens@cloudops.com
> > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > 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<> > > > > > > > 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
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > [image: Shape
>
>
>
> --
> *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