From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA2C51FF170 for ; Sat, 27 Jul 2024 17:09:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 49D5F3752; Sat, 27 Jul 2024 17:08:59 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2024 15:47:12 -0400 To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 27 Jul 2024 17:08:57 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Post: From: Jonathan Nicklin via pve-devel Precedence: list Cc: Jonathan Nicklin X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Help: Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [RFC qemu/storage/qemu-server/container/manager 00/23] backup provider API Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3965623324821893881==" Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-devel" --===============3965623324821893881== Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: X-Original-To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com Delivered-To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5505DC3AFA for ; Fri, 26 Jul 2024 21:47:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 3170A3345F for ; Fri, 26 Jul 2024 21:47:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-qk1-x732.google.com (mail-qk1-x732.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::732]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for ; Fri, 26 Jul 2024 21:47:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-qk1-x732.google.com with SMTP id af79cd13be357-7a1d6f4714bso83345785a.1 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 2024 12:47:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=blockbridge.com; s=google; t=1722023234; x=1722628034; darn=lists.proxmox.com; h=to:date:message-id:subject:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding :from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=sHjy2b6XOiNziIjL70i59JTAzjGFvfYq8SrapqQoVLU=; b=IGZ13fKCFdvm7iPTzXqk8AKJjd8eN8SVtG5roCtW1w1e4YkJBbaFPYZLf63/VCAYBQ SODbLPnv9vaMd1Nd8VGl4/o7mUvJtJnG3WXpBpMXV/hxzDyLVLbNwJFK9CKhD8zvuX/G BmtyqlLpqbWW72S09qXBgb1wN7DRtiTPFQyrh8mf+huq43f8A6fp2hHq6YPfEMVmGl5W /DvTylIz0C/GCcQkerZbuMSDzyPBy+3MXt9vaLUKauqrSzU3jL1nw7QGYSUckDwPxAwg WLWoxeFOsG/+Ifk1i+TSj1uv/TX4/iDUP+qbfbXZ9YHT3b2+UMyV+nFVGlTSVi+IZk9q 3XeQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1722023234; x=1722628034; h=to:date:message-id:subject:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding :from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=sHjy2b6XOiNziIjL70i59JTAzjGFvfYq8SrapqQoVLU=; b=tz794wBf20KeQBg+5rTE7BTdAfES7qwWLnpR3cW90oSRGAKrpIWTfk5tXxj762d1VP YFYACIqWtRI14CLseQ706RIRldox0Nr6fFnoS9SGESck0TiLtQ5dr2nMG7Y4BckVzBtt YcpZe7jcoEehNOXvOw+bWAXbNkaAZBnntogO0/gMk5CcGCtjgJzQCPlsmfWeY/amZGFT SHt3x1I8qwCpF9JPMh0Dop1mapBuoUaBqsnBCo210eTw+hvWaZjk/8DJT0j+EYPwVEsV TGd7hMibJ2eIYCpZH5oryrRduWzdC7VdZ+85kiF1p0v0Rlxwp1ZX/M7ywfuOgu0vyiX1 MRwQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yx1MB6BF7943rz8iH1w7k8at5G3Zf2llKNXWK3CHwoA1NQ0DV5s uaGFeWE/yMoOKFxt3PeNrh2g2XtURohyckei2pR4WfJYBaSeeGTtK4j9fAhjTxXGHWfJcEw++NM c X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IG6t8or/PNzxpkKrfgG8CVqb0DUdOuAFuwTxMFzhJNyHHq5AN+u/stxdOZ3Eve3ex7lYpIP4A== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:c50:b0:79c:1345:a7f0 with SMTP id af79cd13be357-7a1e56a0298mr113305885a.27.1722023234000; Fri, 26 Jul 2024 12:47:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtpclient.apple (pool-108-7-52-138.bstnma.fios.verizon.net. [108.7.52.138]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id af79cd13be357-7a1d73b500fsm208046185a.41.2024.07.26.12.47.13 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 26 Jul 2024 12:47:13 -0700 (PDT) From: Jonathan Nicklin Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.20.0.1.32\)) Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [RFC qemu/storage/qemu-server/container/manager 00/23] backup provider API Message-Id: <6B38485B-5520-4E28-824D-E50C699E96A1@blockbridge.com> Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2024 15:47:12 -0400 To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3693.20.0.1.32) X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from domain DMARC_PASS -0.1 DMARC pass policy FAKE_REPLY_B 0.918 - RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE -0.0001 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, no trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [blockbridge.com] X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 27 Jul 2024 17:08:57 +0200 Hi Fiona, Would adding support for offloading incremental difference detection to the underlying storage be feasible with the API updates? The QEMU bitmap strategy works for all storage devices but is far from optimal. If backup coordinated a storage snapshot, the underlying storage could enumerate the differences (or generate a bitmap). This would allow PBS to connect directly to storage and retrieve incremental differences, which could remove the PVE hosts from the equation. This "storage-direct" approach for backup would improve performance, reduce resources, and support incremental backups in all cases (i.e., power failues, shutdowns, etc.). It would also eliminate the dependency on QEMU bitmaps and the overhead of fleecing. Theoretically, this should be possible with any shared storage that can enumerate incremental differences between snapshots: Ceph, Blockbridge, iSCSi/ZFS? Thoughts? --===============3965623324821893881== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel --===============3965623324821893881==--