FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Device-mapper Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 03-24-2009, 07:40 AM
Mikulas Patocka
 
Default about the new snapshots

Hi Jon

The code is here:
http://people.redhat.com/mpatocka/patches/kernel/new-snapshots/devel

(I'll soon upload a new version that can delete snapshots ... I have
written it already, I hadn't done much testing yet)


The generic code is in dm-multisnap.c file. The Fujita+Daniel's exception
store is in dm-multisnap-fujita-daniel.c, my exception store is in the
rest of the files.

Each origin is represented with structure dm_multisnap, it contains list
of attached snapshots, structures dm_multisnap_snap. It also contains
pointer to exception-store-private part, struct exception_store_private
and a method table (struct dm_multisnap_exception_store).

All I/O except reads from the origin is offloaded to a thread. This can be
further optimized, that some more cases could be handled directly.


My snapshot store is composed as a B+tree with snapshot ranges, each entry
contains key (chunk number, start snapshot ID, end snapshot ID) and a
value of a new chunk where this is remapped. Thus, it has unlimited number
of snapshots --- really limited to 2^32. It can be used for example for
rolling snapshots, i.e. take snapshot every 5 minutes to record activity.


Things, you should know if you want to port this implementation into your
code:

In case someone writes to the snapshots, there may be a need to create
multiple copies. For example if you have snapshots 1,2,3 and someone
writes to snapshot 2, it creates key [chunk number,2-2]. If someone writes
to the origin, it needs to create two more records [chunk number,1-1] and
[chunk number,3-3] and perform two copies. If there weren't write to the
snapshot, it would create just one record [chunk number,1-3].

This is done in do_origin_write, the function resets exception store's
search state machine with s->store->reset_query and then repeatedly asks
if there is anything more to remap (s->store->query_next_remap) and if
there is, add an entry to the b+tree (s->store->add_next_remap). When it
finishes all remaps or when it fills all 8 kcopyd slots, it submits the
request to kcopyd.

Fujita+Daniel's store uses bitmask, the upside is that it doesn't ever do
multiple copies, so these methods are implemented in such a way that
query_next_remap succeeds at most once and add_next_remap processes all
the snapshots. The downside of the bitmask is that it is limited to max 64
snapshots.


Another thing (that you'll need to implement in Fujita+Daniel's store too)
is snapshot-to-snapshot copies. It happens when you write to a shared
snapshot chunk. The write can't be dispatched directly (because it would
be reflected to multiple snapshots), so it needs to perform a copy. I do
it in do_snapshot_io, the method is s->store->make_chunk_writeable, it
duplicates the record in the b+tree and returns the destination, where the
data should be copied. After this method is called, kcopyd performs
snapshot-to-snapshot copy.


Another abstraction that I added is check_conflicts method (called by
check_pending_io) --- it checks if a given chunk+snapid conflicts with
kcopyd I/O that is in progress. The exception store fills an union
chunk_descriptor, that union is opaque to the generic code, and the
generic code calls check_conflict method to check if there is conflict
against that I/O. The rationale for this is that in my implementation,
there may be many snapshots, one kcopyd action could create exceptions
even for a range of several hundred snapshots, and it would be unsuitable
to check them one-by-one for conflicts. For Fujita+Daniel's store, the
union holds a 64-bit bitmap which IDs are copied. For my store, it holds
the snapid range that is being copied.


When all kcopyd jobs finish, the method commit is called, it updates the
exception store to reflect changes made so far. My store uses
log-structure layout, this writes the new commit block that contains
updated pointers. Fujita+Daniel's code doesn't have data consistency, so
this only writes all dirty buffers, hoping that the computer won't crash
between individual writes.


Unlike in the old snapshots, in my implementation the bio is retried after
a kcopyd job --- when the job finishes, the bio is put back to the queue
and checked against all the snapshots again. This simplifies design
because not all snapshots need to be processed when processing the bio.
For example, kcopyd has 8 slots, when all the slots are filled, there may
still be unprocessed snapshots. But it doesn't matter, as they'll be
retried.

In the old snapshots, this no-retry-bio thing is wrong too, it causes bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=182659. I already patched it
(http://people.redhat.com/mpatocka/patches/kernel/merging/2.6.28/dm-snapshot-rework-origin-write.patch)
but the patch was somehow forgotten by Alasdair, you may think about
incorporating it into your patchset.


Mikulas

--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
 
Old 03-24-2009, 01:46 PM
Mikulas Patocka
 
Default about the new snapshots

On Tue, 24 Mar 2009, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 04:40:11AM -0400, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> > Things, you should know if you want to port this implementation into your
> > code:
>
> What is Jonathan's code? I thought your patch series was supposed to get
> in after some more work?

Jonathan's code joins Fujita+Daniel's zumastore snasphots with the old
snapshots.

See this:
http://patchwork.kernel.org/bundle/jbrassow/Exception%20Store%20API%20group1/

This group of patches can be found at:
http://patchwork.kernel.org/bundle/jbrassow/Exception%20Store%20API%20group2/

(yesterday when I checked them, the patches had many rejects, but it's
good enough to read the source code and see its architecture)


My code is independent, written from scratch, it joins my snapshot store
with Fujita+Daniel's store.

Alasdair wants to put Jon's patches to the kernel, but I don't know if
they'll be able to port my implementation on the top of it. So maybe we
end up with my code+Jon's code as separate projects, only with the same
interface to userspace. I don't know how it will end.

Mikulas

--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 03:51 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org