1 hour ago
@chmichael, VEEAM's current implementation is exactly the same as the early Microsoft adopters... home made drivers using a copy-on-write function to accommodate the running System. This is the method above that didn't quite meet the consistency requirements of many apps using disk-based or cache implemented datasets. Under Windows, Macrium and Terabyte Unlimited's early implementations of this approach proved to be a bit troublesome... with both adopting Microsoft's VSS approach as soon as it was implemented for use. VSS has its quirks as well but almost all of the original imaging anomalies have been dealt with along the way.
This was the approach by most of the Windows imaging applications circa 2015... I'm sure VEEAM will get here eventually with its Linux implementation but it will just take time.
Now, to ask a very small set of imaging developers, a group that is still trying to get their excellent product to its pinnacle while using state of the art operating System snapshot functionality from the leading OS provider... that's quite an ask. Something requiring developing their apps own snapshotting capability (and forget about CBT <Changed Block Transfer>) is a major effort. I guess if the group felt they were swift enough to pull this off in an OS market that's still miniscule compared to Microosoft Windows... and produce an indispensable product (which would give them the lion's share of the Linux imaging market, hopefully), then they might consider the effort. My take on this group is YES, they're swift enough, but NO, the effort and market size probably isn't worth it at this time. And remember... these folks are primarily Windows developers (APIs well known)... a Linux effort would be a significant learning curve (my guess).
I wish them all the luck in the world as they move forward with their decisions... so far, they've been "on the money" so to speak
This was the approach by most of the Windows imaging applications circa 2015... I'm sure VEEAM will get here eventually with its Linux implementation but it will just take time.
Now, to ask a very small set of imaging developers, a group that is still trying to get their excellent product to its pinnacle while using state of the art operating System snapshot functionality from the leading OS provider... that's quite an ask. Something requiring developing their apps own snapshotting capability (and forget about CBT <Changed Block Transfer>) is a major effort. I guess if the group felt they were swift enough to pull this off in an OS market that's still miniscule compared to Microosoft Windows... and produce an indispensable product (which would give them the lion's share of the Linux imaging market, hopefully), then they might consider the effort. My take on this group is YES, they're swift enough, but NO, the effort and market size probably isn't worth it at this time. And remember... these folks are primarily Windows developers (APIs well known)... a Linux effort would be a significant learning curve (my guess).
I wish them all the luck in the world as they move forward with their decisions... so far, they've been "on the money" so to speak