Skip to content
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

Add ability to specify order of backup and restore of Persistent Volumes #1917

Closed
yashbhutwala opened this issue Sep 27, 2019 · 6 comments
Closed
Labels
Needs Product Blocked needing input or feedback from Product Reviewed Q2 2021

Comments

@yashbhutwala
Copy link

yashbhutwala commented Sep 27, 2019

Describe the problem/challenge you have
I would like to be able to specify the order of backup and restore of Persistent Volumes. For my use-case, the order in which the state of two different databases is captured is very important.

@nrb nrb added the Needs Product Blocked needing input or feedback from Product label Sep 27, 2019
@nrb
Copy link
Contributor

nrb commented Sep 27, 2019

This would be an interesting capability to add, but would like input for @VMmore on roadmap timing.

@yashbhutwala
Copy link
Author

The workaround I'm doing now, is creating a separate backup with 1st level of PVs, and a separate backup for the second step. And then applying the restore in reverse order.

@nrb
Copy link
Contributor

nrb commented Oct 22, 2020

@phuongatemc Does your ordering enhancement fix this issue?

@phuongatemc
Copy link
Contributor

@nrb Yes, the Velero 1.5.1 work for for us.

@nrb
Copy link
Contributor

nrb commented Oct 22, 2020

@yashbhutwala See #2724 for how to specify an ordering for resources on backup now. This is not yet supported on restore, though.

@eleanor-millman
Copy link
Contributor

Closing because the reporter found a workaround and we expect this to be solved by app-aware backups (Velero 2.0 or a bit later).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Needs Product Blocked needing input or feedback from Product Reviewed Q2 2021
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants