Skip to content

kvm,snapshot: note on primary storage dependency #367

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Feb 5, 2024

Conversation

shwstppr
Copy link
Contributor

@shwstppr shwstppr commented Dec 14, 2023

Address apache/cloudstack#8034

Signed-off-by: Abhishek Kumar <abhishek.mrt22@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Abhishek Kumar <abhishek.mrt22@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: dahn <daan.hoogland@gmail.com>
Comment on lines +961 to +962
Between versions 4.17.x, 4.18.0 and 4.18.1, KVM volume snapshot backups were not full snapshots and they rely on the snapshots on the primary storage. To prevent any loss of data, care must be taken during revert operation and it must be ensured that the source primary storage snapshot file is present.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@shwstppr, would not it be useful to guide users on how to identify the affected volumes/snapshots, vide apache/cloudstack#8034 (comment)?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@GutoVeronezi good idea. Though I'm not sure how to structure it.
Would you mind adding a change in the PR as you must be having better understanding on the process?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I missed the last comment; I will put it on my tasks 👍

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@GutoVeronezi any update or should we merge this?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@shwstppr may be we can continue merging this and handle that steps in a different PR. @GutoVeronezi can you please raise a separate PR for that.

@shwstppr shwstppr added this to the 4.19 milestone Dec 15, 2023
@shwstppr
Copy link
Contributor Author

@andrijapanicsb @rajujith can you please review?

Copy link
Contributor

@harikrishna-patnala harikrishna-patnala left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@shwstppr shwstppr merged commit d566bb1 into apache:main Feb 5, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants