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 F019E1FF39F for ; Fri, 10 May 2024 11:08:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1C4741A1C3; Fri, 10 May 2024 11:08:07 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <1681878c-ef3a-484a-a725-4c688467a5df@proxmox.com> Date: Fri, 10 May 2024 11:07:59 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird To: Alexander Burke , Proxmox VE user list References: <738ba899-5a52-4000-ba61-83dd0e360df4@elettra.eu> <6598939f-2be1-45a9-8cc5-c9c473373c29@oeg.com.au> <2b94dfec-54d4-4a48-a379-01ef15713da5@elettra.eu> <2e504103-279a-4b24-a918-70d68e63220c@oeg.com.au> <11db3d6f-1879-44b3-9f99-01e6fde6ebc8@alexburke.ca> Content-Language: en-US From: Fiona Ebner In-Reply-To: <11db3d6f-1879-44b3-9f99-01e6fde6ebc8@alexburke.ca> X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.065 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment 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. [proxmox.com] Subject: Re: [PVE-User] Unresponsive VM(s) during VZdump X-BeenThere: pve-user@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE user list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Proxmox VE user list Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: pve-user-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-user" Am 09.05.24 um 13:24 schrieb Alexander Burke: > Hello all, > > My understanding is that if the backing store is ZFS, a snapshot of the zvol underlying the guest's disk(s) is instant and atomic, and the snapshot is what gets backed up so fleecing is moot. Am I wrong on this? > The snapshot-level backup in Proxmox VE is not done on the storage layer, but in the QEMU block layer. That makes it independent of whether/how the underlying storage supports snapshots and allows for dirty tracking for incremental backup. See here for further information/discussion why it's not done on the storage layer: https://pve.proxmox.com/pve-docs/chapter-vzdump.html#_vm_backup_fleecing https://bugzilla.proxmox.com/show_bug.cgi?id=3233#c19 Best Regards, Fiona _______________________________________________ pve-user mailing list pve-user@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user