-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 88
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
endpoint: refactor, fix stale holds on initial replication, holds release subcmds #293
Conversation
d026b62
to
3b74b0c
Compare
@InsanePrawn would you mind testing this commit? |
(Also, any code review is appreciated!) |
…ease subcmds - endpoint abstractions now share an interface `Abstraction` - pkg endpoint now has a query facitilty (`ListAbstractions`) which is used to find on-disk - step holds and bookmarks - replication cursors (v1, v2) - last-received-holds - the `zrepl holds list` command consumes endpoint.ListAbstractions - the new `zrepl holds release-{all,stale}` commands can be used to remove abstractions of package endpoint Co-authored-by: InsanePrawn <insane.prawny@gmail.com> supersedes #282 fixes #280 fixes #278
…stor and SendCompleted RPCs
8b74e9c
to
5749103
Compare
5749103
to
47d7bba
Compare
…to problame/holds-release-and-hold-leak-fix-v2
|
I ran it and cleared some holds (incidentally while zrepl was running), it then complained that it couldn't replicate because the last-received-hold couldn't be moved because it has to be a snapshot. I then cleared all holds, installed the master branch (which worked again), then tried the branch again. Even then, it currently always fails with:
like errors for every dataset. The master branch works though |
Which commit were you running? I pushed 8755847 to this branch yesterday evening which, despite it's wrong commit message, fixes the problem with the last-received-hold. I'd appreciate it if you could once again compare the most recent version of this branch and continue testing it. |
Weird, I had thought that I tried that - nevertheless I tried again and it works now. It's just not as speedy as the non-hold based version at all currently |
Please let it do a few runs, then send the debug (!) logs. We are logging execution time now, I'll run some stats and see what's the bottleneck in your case. |
config option log level "debug" is sufficient? |
Yes, just make sure the thing you are logging to doesn't throw away log messages, that would skew the stats. (I suppose it doesn't) |
…s' into problame/holds-release-and-hold-leak-fix-v2
…holds-release-and-hold-leak-fix-v2
…holds-release-and-hold-leak-fix-v2
|
|
|
…ng (likely needs fixup from next commit)
…holds-release-and-hold-leak-fix-v2
…stChan and ZFSBookmark
…cursors and falling back to step holds for initial replication
…olds release subcmds, more efficient ZFS queries The motivation for this recatoring are based on two independent issues: - @JMoVS found that the changes merged as part of #259 slowed his OS X based installation down significantly. Analysis of the zfs command logging introduced in #296 showed that `zfs holds` took most of the execution time, and they pointed out that not all of those `zfs holds` invocations were actually necessary. I.e.: zrepl was inefficient about retrieving information from ZFS. - @InsanePrawn found that failures on initial replication would lead to step holds accumulating on the sending side, i.e. they would never be cleaned up in the HintMostRecentCommonAncestor RPC handler. That was because we only sent that RPC if there was a most recent common ancestor detected during replication planning. @InsanePrawn prototyped an implementation of a `zrepl holds release` command to mitigate the situation. As part of that development work and back-and-forth with @problame, it became evident that the abstractions that #259 built on top of zfs in package endpoint (step holds, replication cursor, last-received-hold), were not well-represented for re-use in the `zrepl holds release` subocommand. This commit refactors package endpoint to address both of these issues: - endpoint abstractions now share an interface `Abstraction` that, among other things, provides a uniform `Destroy()` method. However, that method should not be destroyed directly but instead the package-level `BatchDestroy` function should be used in order to allow for a migration to zfs channel programs in the future. - endpoint now has a query facitilty (`ListAbstractions`) which is used to find on-disk - step holds and bookmarks - replication cursors (v1, v2) - last-received-holds By describing the query in a struct, we can centralized the retrieval of information via the ZFS CLI and only have to be clever once. We are "clever" in the following ways: - When asking for hold-based abstractions, we only run `zfs holds` on snapshot that have `userrefs` > 0 - To support this functionality, add field `UserRefs` to zfs.FilesystemVersion and retrieve it anywhere we retrieve zfs.FilesystemVersion from ZFS. - When asking only for bookmark-based abstractions, we only run `zfs list -t bookmark`, not with snapshots. - Currently unused (except for CLI) per-filesystem concurrent lookup - Option to only include abstractions with CreateTXG in a specified range - refactor `endpoint`'s various ZFS info retrieval methods to use `ListAbstractions` - change the `zrepl holds list` command to consume endpoint.ListAbstractions - Add a `ListStale` method which, given a query template, lists stale holds and bookmarks. - it uses replication cursor has different modes - the new `zrepl holds release-{all,stale}` commands can be used to remove abstractions of package endpoint - Adjust HintMostRecentCommonAncestor RPC for stale-holds cleanup: - send it also if no most recent common ancestor exists between sender and receiver - have the sender clean up its abstractions when it receives the RPC with no most recent common ancestor, using `ListStale` - Due to changed semantics, bump the protocol version. - Adjust HintMostRecentCommonAncestor RPC for performance problems encountered by @JMoVS - by default, per (job,fs)-combination, only consider cleaning step holds in the createtxg range `[last replication cursor,conservatively-estimated-receive-side-version)` - this behavior ensures resumability at cost proportional to the time that replication was donw - however, as explained in a comment, we might leak holds if the zrepl daemon stops running - that trade-off is acceptable because in the presumably rare this might happen the user has two tools at their hand: - Tool 1: run `zrepl holds release-stale` - Tool 2: use env var `ZREPL_ENDPOINT_SENDER_HINT_MOST_RECENT_STEP_HOLD_CLEANUP_MODE` to adjust the lower bound of the createtxg range (search for it in the code). The env var can also be used to disable hold-cleanup on the send-side entirely. supersedes closes #293 supersedes closes #282 fixes #280 fixes #278 Additionaly, we fixed a couple of bugs: - zfs: fix half-nil error reporting of dataset-does-not-exist for ZFSListChan and ZFSBookmark - endpoint: Sender's `HintMostRecentCommonAncestor` handler would not check whether access to the specified filesystem was allowed.
final revision of this PR will be reviewed here #300 |
…fs-abstractions subcmd, more efficient ZFS queries The motivation for this recatoring are based on two independent issues: - @JMoVS found that the changes merged as part of #259 slowed his OS X based installation down significantly. Analysis of the zfs command logging introduced in #296 showed that `zfs holds` took most of the execution time, and they pointed out that not all of those `zfs holds` invocations were actually necessary. I.e.: zrepl was inefficient about retrieving information from ZFS. - @InsanePrawn found that failures on initial replication would lead to step holds accumulating on the sending side, i.e. they would never be cleaned up in the HintMostRecentCommonAncestor RPC handler. That was because we only sent that RPC if there was a most recent common ancestor detected during replication planning. @InsanePrawn prototyped an implementation of a `zrepl zfs-abstractions release` command to mitigate the situation. As part of that development work and back-and-forth with @problame, it became evident that the abstractions that #259 built on top of zfs in package endpoint (step holds, replication cursor, last-received-hold), were not well-represented for re-use in the `zrepl zfs-abstractions release` subocommand prototype. This commit refactors package endpoint to address both of these issues: - endpoint abstractions now share an interface `Abstraction` that, among other things, provides a uniform `Destroy()` method. However, that method should not be destroyed directly but instead the package-level `BatchDestroy` function should be used in order to allow for a migration to zfs channel programs in the future. - endpoint now has a query facitilty (`ListAbstractions`) which is used to find on-disk - step holds and bookmarks - replication cursors (v1, v2) - last-received-holds By describing the query in a struct, we can centralized the retrieval of information via the ZFS CLI and only have to be clever once. We are "clever" in the following ways: - When asking for hold-based abstractions, we only run `zfs holds` on snapshot that have `userrefs` > 0 - To support this functionality, add field `UserRefs` to zfs.FilesystemVersion and retrieve it anywhere we retrieve zfs.FilesystemVersion from ZFS. - When asking only for bookmark-based abstractions, we only run `zfs list -t bookmark`, not with snapshots. - Currently unused (except for CLI) per-filesystem concurrent lookup - Option to only include abstractions with CreateTXG in a specified range - refactor `endpoint`'s various ZFS info retrieval methods to use `ListAbstractions` - rename the `zrepl holds list` command to `zrepl zfs-abstractions list` - make `zrepl zfs-abstractions list` consume endpoint.ListAbstractions - Add a `ListStale` method which, given a query template, lists stale holds and bookmarks. - it uses replication cursor has different modes - the new `zrepl zfs-abstractions release-{all,stale}` commands can be used to remove abstractions of package endpoint - Adjust HintMostRecentCommonAncestor RPC for stale-holds cleanup: - send it also if no most recent common ancestor exists between sender and receiver - have the sender clean up its abstractions when it receives the RPC with no most recent common ancestor, using `ListStale` - Due to changed semantics, bump the protocol version. - Adjust HintMostRecentCommonAncestor RPC for performance problems encountered by @JMoVS - by default, per (job,fs)-combination, only consider cleaning step holds in the createtxg range `[last replication cursor,conservatively-estimated-receive-side-version)` - this behavior ensures resumability at cost proportional to the time that replication was donw - however, as explained in a comment, we might leak holds if the zrepl daemon stops running - that trade-off is acceptable because in the presumably rare this might happen the user has two tools at their hand: - Tool 1: run `zrepl zfs-abstractions release-stale` - Tool 2: use env var `ZREPL_ENDPOINT_SENDER_HINT_MOST_RECENT_STEP_HOLD_CLEANUP_MODE` to adjust the lower bound of the createtxg range (search for it in the code). The env var can also be used to disable hold-cleanup on the send-side entirely. supersedes closes #293 supersedes closes #282 fixes #280 fixes #278 Additionaly, we fixed a couple of bugs: - zfs: fix half-nil error reporting of dataset-does-not-exist for ZFSListChan and ZFSBookmark - endpoint: Sender's `HintMostRecentCommonAncestor` handler would not check whether access to the specified filesystem was allowed.
endpoint: refactor, fix stale holds on initial replication, holds release subcmds
Abstraction
ListAbstractions
) which isused to find on-disk
zrepl holds list
command consumes endpoint.ListAbstractionszrepl holds release-{all,stale}
commands can be usedto remove abstractions of package endpoint
supersedes #282
fixes #280
fixes #278