From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5EB171FF16E for ; Mon, 29 Jul 2024 22:49:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 5AA6D324BC; Mon, 29 Jul 2024 22:49:49 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <392733040.7156.1722149167597@webmail.proxmox.com> Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2024 09:54:48 -0400 References: <1137775171.7131.1722093632719@webmail.proxmox.com> <392733040.7156.1722149167597@webmail.proxmox.com> To: Dietmar Maurer X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 29 Jul 2024 22:49:46 +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 , Proxmox VE development discussion 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="===============3531864196194424006==" Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-devel" --===============3531864196194424006== 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) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 261B5C04C9 for ; Sun, 28 Jul 2024 15:55:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 06E609578 for ; Sun, 28 Jul 2024 15:54:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-qk1-x72f.google.com (mail-qk1-x72f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72f]) (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 ; Sun, 28 Jul 2024 15:54:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-qk1-x72f.google.com with SMTP id af79cd13be357-7a1df0a93eeso138978485a.1 for ; Sun, 28 Jul 2024 06:54:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=blockbridge.com; s=google; t=1722174890; x=1722779690; darn=lists.proxmox.com; h=to:references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:cc:date :in-reply-to:from:subject:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=hJRcyiQ4umoQXZrVMQiDAkTWwcdKqHnXPsegmkqPMvc=; b=pC/y952L2pMXlk/NgXva4t+Ci7ewyRjf9mMCbaFT6nR7ta3LhGZHZR+twfDDqmlgk2 w6ClSdGhy8k2WSclRSKps9YKbWFinCfKEKwpSWGCOFqgpLqadZQL3Jkxpc7EZRMZhFSq I6GqgvUZubbjrTv+WKYzcaq9ARtZSzGMakRo5e/qArJKn1kPkJ6e8S+aWlIR6BdcyDeO a3kW3tSklueyFOetJmLR0M/d6HAnjtDBjc+l2jnup/0Q/5d62AOe4+2OIMASXlaz4eNB 5qibuUWKrSSf5UdYvOqT0vRm9pUVNc5XsOBnojK2GVt/uf/NUj/GwfZBG6NQfjK0H9t5 +QAA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1722174890; x=1722779690; h=to:references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:cc:date :in-reply-to:from:subject:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=hJRcyiQ4umoQXZrVMQiDAkTWwcdKqHnXPsegmkqPMvc=; b=rStfw6Mbe5eeTXkxg8+b1hd6B3pN7/qJhy9+6j+e/rzGq1dF4Dj5rysU4LZw9qug9V W4YQbjaiM8G7jnNvaO+kl14z6bUVc1J9HQf+bRpWRKez+5Of5pC1bh9X2I7gg4kawKH3 7uSqaHfZgjxVPHTZ2JZQQD0m8Psu0Cha3+7nlaRXvC+PoboSZg/SnaW8ZBRf5UYnIuCJ wmf7djz8q+/ZyTOMt5w/rkVvW8eP+13TlV2Jtb4FT8gd/favmw+AjKAEwZDIoVRukbDg UQOjoE/N609PwB3wmdbKG+1NWbP9nZ+VvhK2NWy6t/OTCDKIGJ4RdWAk0ByxiCCsNlTD x/Rw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yz/bDUuZlfLweIXYnzYxNCSeFhz7iWYEwI4WSFsLDObS33TQy4p LFG7m0LRWv2voEkhqGeUlnE+2Av2OsDgygjNgt4dEzxzOCNfhzvGqD6CN7iWWLJdckk2TrbZ68s d X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHMT/YTBzBcT11Jbv+dKSQkgWWNx2lQMg7Lk66LMXQ1x3fdDVMm/i/6TncWhZ5Ig7BU50FZbQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:c6d:b0:6b5:61:53a9 with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-6bb55a44458mr54944846d6.28.1722174890206; Sun, 28 Jul 2024 06:54:50 -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 6a1803df08f44-6bb3f8d8280sm42445486d6.18.2024.07.28.06.54.49 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 28 Jul 2024 06:54:49 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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 From: Jonathan Nicklin X-Priority: 3 In-Reply-To: <392733040.7156.1722149167597@webmail.proxmox.com> Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2024 09:54:48 -0400 Cc: Proxmox VE development discussion Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <1C86CC96-2C9C-466A-A2A9-FC95906C098E@blockbridge.com> References: <1137775171.7131.1722093632719@webmail.proxmox.com> <392733040.7156.1722149167597@webmail.proxmox.com> To: Dietmar Maurer X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3693.20.0.1.32) X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.230 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address 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 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 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 29 Jul 2024 22:49:46 +0200 In hyper-converged deployments, the node performing the backup is = sourcing ((nodes-1)/(nodes))*bytes) of backup data (i.e., ingress = traffic) and then sending 1*bytes to PBS (i.e., egress traffic). If PBS = were to pull the data from the nodes directly, the maximum load on any = one host would be (1/nodes)*bytes of egress traffic only... that's a = considerable improvement! Further, nodes that don't host OSDs would be completely quiet. So, in = the case of non-converged CEPH, the hypervisor nodes do not need to = participate in the backup flow at all. > On Jul 28, 2024, at 2:46 AM, Dietmar Maurer = wrote: >=20 >> Today, I believe the client is reading the data and pushing it to >> PBS. In the case of CEPH, wouldn't this involve sourcing data from >> multiple nodes and then sending it to PBS? Wouldn't it be more >> efficient for PBS to read it directly from storage? In the case of >> centralized storage, we'd like to eliminate the client load >> completely, having PBS ingest increment differences directly from >> storage without passing through the client. >=20 > But Ceph is not a central storage. Instead, data is distributed among = the nodes, so you always need to send some data over the network. > There is no way to "read it directly from storage". >=20 --===============3531864196194424006== 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 --===============3531864196194424006==--