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-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users