On 06.03.24 16:44, Fiona Ebner wrote:
Am 29.02.24 um 13:47 schrieb Fiona Ebner:
Am 29.02.24 um 12:48 schrieb Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy:
On 29.02.24 13:11, Fiona Ebner wrote:
The iotest creates a new target image for each incremental sync which
only records the diff relative to the
Am 29.02.24 um 13:47 schrieb Fiona Ebner:
> Am 29.02.24 um 12:48 schrieb Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy:
>> On 29.02.24 13:11, Fiona Ebner wrote:
>>>
>>> The iotest creates a new target image for each incremental sync which
>>> only records the diff relative to the previous mirror and those diff
>>>
On February 29, 2024 11:41 am, Fiona Ebner wrote:
> Am 28.02.24 um 17:24 schrieb Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy:
>> On 16.02.24 13:55, Fiona Ebner wrote:
>>> Previous discussion from when this was sent upstream [0] (it's been a
>>> while). I rebased the patches and re-ordered and squashed like
>>>
Am 01.03.24 um 16:46 schrieb Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy:
> On 01.03.24 18:14, Fiona Ebner wrote:
>> Am 01.03.24 um 16:02 schrieb Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy:
> About documentation: actually, I never liked that we use for backup
> job
> "MirrorSyncMode". Now it looks more like
On 01.03.24 18:14, Fiona Ebner wrote:
Am 01.03.24 um 16:02 schrieb Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy:
On 01.03.24 17:52, Fiona Ebner wrote:
Am 01.03.24 um 15:14 schrieb Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy:
As we already understood, (block-)job-api needs some spring-cleaning.
Unfortunately I don't have
Am 01.03.24 um 16:02 schrieb Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy:
> On 01.03.24 17:52, Fiona Ebner wrote:
>> Am 01.03.24 um 15:14 schrieb Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy:
>>>
>>> As we already understood, (block-)job-api needs some spring-cleaning.
>>> Unfortunately I don't have much time on it, but still I
On 01.03.24 17:52, Fiona Ebner wrote:
Am 01.03.24 um 15:14 schrieb Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy:
As we already understood, (block-)job-api needs some spring-cleaning.
Unfortunately I don't have much time on it, but still I decided to start
from finally depreacting block-job-* API and moving to
Am 01.03.24 um 15:14 schrieb Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy:
>
> As we already understood, (block-)job-api needs some spring-cleaning.
> Unfortunately I don't have much time on it, but still I decided to start
> from finally depreacting block-job-* API and moving to job-*.. Probably
>
On 29.02.24 17:50, Fiona Ebner wrote:
Am 29.02.24 um 13:00 schrieb Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy:
But anyway, this all could be simply achieved with
bitmap-copying/merging API, if we allow to pass user-given bitmap to the
mirror as working bitmap.
I see, I'll drop the 'bitmap-mode' in the
Am 29.02.24 um 13:00 schrieb Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy:
>
> But anyway, this all could be simply achieved with
> bitmap-copying/merging API, if we allow to pass user-given bitmap to the
> mirror as working bitmap.
>
>>
>> I see, I'll drop the 'bitmap-mode' in the next version if nobody
>>
Am 29.02.24 um 12:48 schrieb Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy:
> On 29.02.24 13:11, Fiona Ebner wrote:
>>
>> The iotest creates a new target image for each incremental sync which
>> only records the diff relative to the previous mirror and those diff
>> images are later rebased onto each other to get
On 29.02.24 13:41, Fiona Ebner wrote:
Am 28.02.24 um 17:24 schrieb Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy:
On 16.02.24 13:55, Fiona Ebner wrote:
Previous discussion from when this was sent upstream [0] (it's been a
while). I rebased the patches and re-ordered and squashed like
suggested back then [1].
On 29.02.24 13:11, Fiona Ebner wrote:
Am 28.02.24 um 17:06 schrieb Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy:
On 28.02.24 19:00, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
On 16.02.24 13:55, Fiona Ebner wrote:
Now, the IO test added in patch 4/4 actually contains yet another use
case, namely doing incremental
Am 28.02.24 um 17:24 schrieb Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy:
> On 16.02.24 13:55, Fiona Ebner wrote:
>> Previous discussion from when this was sent upstream [0] (it's been a
>> while). I rebased the patches and re-ordered and squashed like
>> suggested back then [1].
>>
>> This implements two new
Am 28.02.24 um 17:06 schrieb Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy:
> On 28.02.24 19:00, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
>> On 16.02.24 13:55, Fiona Ebner wrote:
>>> Now, the IO test added in patch 4/4 actually contains yet another use
>>> case, namely doing incremental mirrors to stand-alone qcow2
On 16.02.24 13:55, Fiona Ebner wrote:
Previous discussion from when this was sent upstream [0] (it's been a
while). I rebased the patches and re-ordered and squashed like
suggested back then [1].
This implements two new mirror modes:
- bitmap mirror mode with always/on-success/never bitmap
On 28.02.24 19:00, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
On 16.02.24 13:55, Fiona Ebner wrote:
Previous discussion from when this was sent upstream [0] (it's been a
while). I rebased the patches and re-ordered and squashed like
suggested back then [1].
This implements two new mirror modes:
-
On 16.02.24 13:55, Fiona Ebner wrote:
Previous discussion from when this was sent upstream [0] (it's been a
while). I rebased the patches and re-ordered and squashed like
suggested back then [1].
This implements two new mirror modes:
- bitmap mirror mode with always/on-success/never bitmap
Previous discussion from when this was sent upstream [0] (it's been a
while). I rebased the patches and re-ordered and squashed like
suggested back then [1].
This implements two new mirror modes:
- bitmap mirror mode with always/on-success/never bitmap sync mode
- incremental mirror mode as
19 matches
Mail list logo
