Skip to content

Add incremental backup procedures for containerized deployments - #5317

Open
aneta-petrova wants to merge 6 commits into
theforeman:masterfrom
aneta-petrova:foremanctl-incremental
Open

aneta-petrova wants to merge 6 commits into
theforeman:masterfrom
aneta-petrova:foremanctl-incremental

Conversation

@aneta-petrova

@aneta-petrova aneta-petrova commented Sep 14, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

What changes are you introducing?

Adding incremental backup and restore for containerized deployments.

Why are you introducing these changes? (Explanation, links to references, issues, etc.)

To extend our containerized docs set.

https://github.com/theforeman/foremanctl/blob/master/docs/user/backup-restore.md

https://redhat.atlassian.net/browse/SAT-45935 and https://redhat.atlassian.net/browse/SAT-45938

Anything else to add? (Considerations, potential downsides, alternative solutions you have explored, etc.)

N/A

Contributor checklists

  • I am okay with my commits getting squashed when you merge this PR.
  • I am familiar with the contributing guidelines.

Please cherry-pick my commits into:

  • Foreman 5.0/Katello 5.0
  • Foreman 3.19/Katello 4.21
  • Foreman 3.18/Katello 4.20 (Satellite 6.19; orcharhino 7.9 and 7.10)
  • Foreman 3.17/Katello 4.19
  • Foreman 3.16/Katello 4.18 (Satellite 6.18; orcharhino 7.6, 7.7, and 7.8)
  • Foreman 3.15/Katello 4.17
  • Foreman 3.14/Katello 4.16 (Satellite 6.17; orcharhino 7.4; orcharhino 7.5)
  • We do not accept PRs for Foreman older than 3.14.

@github-actions github-actions Bot added Needs tech review Requires a review from the technical perspective Needs style review Requires a review from docs style/grammar perspective Needs testing Requires functional testing labels Sep 14, 2026
@aneta-petrova

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Hi @Chyenne8, as the author of theforeman/foremanctl#609, could you please review this documentation PR?

There is new content related to incremental backup and restore in these sections:

  • Available backup methods
  • Performing an incremental backup
  • Example of a weekly full backup followed by daily incremental backups
  • Restoring from incremental backups

But I think at least skimming chapters Backing up {Project} and Restoring {Project} from backup as a whole could be a good idea as well.

The relevant build links are https://theforeman-foreman-documentation-preview-pr-5317.surge.sh/nightly/Administering_Project/index-containerized-katello.html (containerized Katello) and https://theforeman-foreman-documentation-preview-pr-5317.surge.sh/nightly/Administering_Project/index-satellite.html (Satellite).

@aneta-petrova

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Hi @vsedmik, it looks like you were the QA contact for this foremanctl update. Can you please test the docs?

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Comment thread guides/common/modules/ref_available-backup-methods.adoc Outdated
Comment thread guides/common/modules/proc_restoring-from-incremental-backups.adoc Outdated
Comment thread guides/common/modules/proc_restoring-from-incremental-backups.adoc Outdated
Comment thread guides/common/modules/proc_performing-an-incremental-backup.adoc Outdated
aneta-petrova and others added 2 commits September 14, 2026 13:48
Co-authored-by: Maximilian Kolb <mail@maximilian-kolb.de>

@vsedmik vsedmik left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good! The snippets work and make sense. I'd just suggest rewording the sentence @maximiliankolb pointed out.

@aneta-petrova aneta-petrova added testing done No issues from the functional perspective and removed Needs testing Requires functional testing labels Sep 15, 2026

@maximiliankolb maximiliankolb left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

style-wise LGTM.

Comment thread guides/common/modules/proc_restoring-from-incremental-backups.adoc Outdated
@maximiliankolb maximiliankolb added style review done No issues from docs style/grammar perspective and removed Needs style review Requires a review from docs style/grammar perspective labels Sep 15, 2026

@Chyenne8 Chyenne8 left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Removing line 38 makes sense. Otherwise looks good to merge, the doc makes sense and is accurate.

Comment thread guides/common/modules/proc_restoring-from-incremental-backups.adoc Outdated

.Procedure
. Restore the last full backup using the instructions in xref:Restoring_from_a_Full_Backup_{context}[].
. Remove the full backup data from the local file system on {ProjectServer}, for example, `/var/` or `/var/tmp/`.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

These two steps need ifndef::containerized[] guards, as written the containerized procedure cannot succeed.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wasn't sure which steps are the "two steps" so I checked https://github.com/theforeman/foremanctl/blob/master/docs/user/backup-restore.md again. @Chyenne8 can you please re-review this procedure just to be 100% sure I got this feedback right?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes the changes look correct.

Co-authored-by: Chyenne8 <chyenner444@gmail.com>

@Chyenne8 Chyenne8 left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

All feedback has been addressed, looks good to merge

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Needs tech review Requires a review from the technical perspective style review done No issues from docs style/grammar perspective testing done No issues from the functional perspective

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants