From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1J01k0-0007J4-Sv for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 05 Dec 2007 16:25:12 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1J01jw-00079v-5K for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 05 Dec 2007 16:25:12 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J01jw-000783-0h for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 05 Dec 2007 16:25:08 -0500 Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.180]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1J01jt-0005op-W3 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 05 Dec 2007 16:25:06 -0500 Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id k22so8111878waf for ; Wed, 05 Dec 2007 13:25:04 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <8a6cde920712051325n193c5166m60e1c3135f1e23a1@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 21:25:03 +0000 From: "Ricardo Almeida" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Online image backup In-Reply-To: <4756B1DD.4040009@develer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <4756B1DD.4040009@develer.com> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Hi, Discalmer: I'm just a user of QEmu :) > Fabrice, that's just part of the problem. A full automated remote > backup service for qemu VMs should work like this: > > 1. send a "savevm state" command to qemu; > 2. wait for savevm completion; 2.1 Switch to snapshot mode > 3. perform an *online* copy (cp, rsync, whatever) of the .qcow2 image, > while it's still running in qemu; 3.1 Pause VM 3.2 Apply snapshot changes to local and remote copy (remote must be running something that can apply the update) 3.3 Back to normal mode > 4. ...repeat for all running VMs. > [...] > The weak spot of this configuration is the third step of backup: if you > perform an online copy (and that's your only real choice, since you > don't want to powerdown the VMs every night just to backup them), you > are copying a file while it's always modifying, and chances are high > that the copy will be corrupted (i.e. different from any state the > original went through), since you can't perform the copy with a single read. See the above added steps :) Is this a bad idea? Regards and keep up the good work :), Ricardo Almeida