Re: RBD snapshot atomicity guarantees?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Dear Hector,

we are using the very same approach on CentOS 7 (freeze + thaw), but preceeded by an fstrim. With virtio-scsi, using fstrim propagates the discards from within the VM to Ceph RBD (if qemu is configured accordingly),
and a lot of space is saved.

We have yet to observe these hangs, we are running this with ~5 VMs with ~10 disks for about half a year now with daily snapshots. But all of these VMs have very "low" I/O,
since we put anything I/O intensive on bare metal (but with automated provisioning of course).

So I'll chime in on your question, especially since there might be VMs on our cluster in the future where the inner OS may not be running an agent.
Since we did not observe this yet, I'll also add: What's your "scale", is it hundreds of VMs / disks? Hourly snapshots? I/O intensive VMs?

Cheers,
	Oliver

Am 18.12.18 um 10:10 schrieb Hector Martin:
Hi list,

I'm running libvirt qemu guests on RBD, and currently taking backups by issuing a domfsfreeze, taking a snapshot, and then issuing a domfsthaw. This seems to be a common approach.

This is safe, but it's impactful: the guest has frozen I/O for the duration of the snapshot. This is usually only a few seconds. Unfortunately, the freeze action doesn't seem to be very reliable. Sometimes it times out, leaving the guest in a messy situation with frozen I/O (thaw times out too when this happens, or returns success but FSes end up frozen anyway). This is clearly a bug somewhere, but I wonder whether the freeze is a hard requirement or not.

Are there any atomicity guarantees for RBD snapshots taken *without* freezing the filesystem? Obviously the filesystem will be dirty and will require journal recovery, but that is okay; it's equivalent to a hard shutdown/crash. But is there any chance of corruption related to the snapshot being taken in a non-atomic fashion? Filesystems and applications these days should have no trouble with hard shutdowns, as long as storage writes follow ordering guarantees (no writes getting reordered across a barrier and such).

Put another way: do RBD snapshots have ~identical atomicity guarantees to e.g. LVM snapshots?

If we can get away without the freeze, honestly I'd rather go that route. If I really need to pause I/O during the snapshot creation, I might end up resorting to pausing the whole VM (suspend/resume), which has higher impact but also probably a much lower chance of messing up (or having excess latency), since it doesn't involve the guest OS or the qemu agent at all...



Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com

[Index of Archives]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Ceph Development]     [Ceph Large]     [Linux USB Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [xfs]


  Powered by Linux