[flud-devel] DHT justifications (was: DHT Performance? Design?)
bill at broadley.org
Wed Nov 14 00:27:13 PST 2007
Alen Peacock wrote:
> On Nov 11, 2007 9:14 AM, Alen Peacock <alenlpeacock at gmail.com> wrote:
>> flud is a pure mirroring backup service, not a generic storage grid.
>> Rather than complicating things to support a non use case, flud just
>> requires that the initiator retain a copy
> BTW, that's not to say that doing something a bit more sophisticated
> isn't a good option for a generic storage service
I don't think of the equivalent of a traditional backup system as storage
grid. I agree that archival use is a different problem. Archival use
is often left out of other backup systems as well (like backuppc). Amanda
was tape based so you could take a tape rotation out of service, but it didn't
really support integrated archival use.
> or even for an
> archival service -- just that flud's scope is intentionally narrower
> than that.
Seems like a small tweak to me for a major increase in protection for users
of flud. Maybe it should be flud mirror instead of flud backup. Wikipedia
seems to agree:
Backups are useful primarily for two purposes. The first is to restore a
computer to an operational state following a disaster (called disaster
recovery). The second is to restore small numbers of files after they have
been accidentally deleted or corrupted.
IMO, a mirroring system that would delete a file a file within an arbitrarily
short window (say you edit your thesis just before the cron job) isn't really
a backup system.
More information about the flud-devel