On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 12:01:45PM -0400, Dan Langille wrote: > pay more attention to my general suggestion: namely, pick a solution > that is Bacula independent. >> His idea is a repeat of one of my suggestions, namely teaching Bacula >> to interact directly with S3. > Great. :)
You realise that a solution that is bacula independent and a solution that teaches Bacula to interact directly with S3 are opposites, right? > But my understanding is it involves write a driver which confirms to > the API. Much like writing a SCSI interface to S3. Um.. No. It's not like writing a SCSI interface to S3 at all. As someone else pointed out, the semantics of interfacing with a tape drive and S3 are very different. I'm not saying it couldn't be done, but it would be a horrible hack, and would be useless for anything but applications that deal with tapes, so you've won absolutely nothing. Even interfacing with S3 and a filesystem is different. AFAIK, you can't open a "file" on S3 and seek back and forth in it and access it randomly. Also, which API are you referring to? Bacula's or S3's? -- Soren Hansen | Virtualisation specialist | Ubuntu Server Team Canonical Ltd. | http://www.ubuntu.com/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________ Bacula-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-devel
