From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Zhang Haoyu" Subject: Re: [question] incremental backup a running vm Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 20:25:06 +0800 Message-ID: <201501262024561264834@sangfor.com.cn> References: <201501211832330964659@sangfor.com.cn>, <54BF81F0.9070908@redhat.com>, <20150122232948.GQ12638@tesla.redhat.com>, <201501260907583380898@sangfor.com.cn>, <201501261913435951960@sangfor.com.cn>, <54C624E2.2010608@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "qemu-devel" , "kvm" , "Stefan Hajnoczi" , "Fam Zheng" To: "Paolo Bonzini" , "Kashyap Chamarthy" Return-path: Received: from smtp.sanfor.com ([58.251.49.30]:53837 "EHLO mail.sangfor.com.cn" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753812AbbAZMZK (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Jan 2015 07:25:10 -0500 Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 2015-01-26 19:29:03, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > On 26/01/2015 12:13, Zhang Haoyu wrote: > > Thanks, Paolo, > > but too many internal snapshots were saved by customers, >> switching to external snapshot mechanism has significant impaction > > on subsequent upgrade. > > In that case, patches are welcome. :) > > > Another problem: > > drive_backup just implement one time backup, > > but I want VMWare's VDP-like backup mechanism. > > The initial backup of a virtual machine takes comparatively more time, >> because all of the data for that virtual machine is being backed up. > > Subsequent backups of the same virtual machine take less time, because > > changed block tracking (log dirty) mechanism is used to only backup the dirty data. > > After inittial backup done, even the VM shutdown, but subsequent backup also only >> copy the changed data. > > As mentioned before, patches for this are on the list. > I see, thanks, Paolo. > Paolo