Re: RBD snapshot atomicity guarantees?

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

 



For what it worth, we are using snapshots on a daily basis for a couple
of thousands rbd volume for some times

So far so good, we have not catched any issue

On 12/18/2018 10:28 AM, Oliver Freyermuth wrote:
> 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...
>>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ceph-users mailing list
> ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
> 
_______________________________________________
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]     [Ceph Dev]     [Linux USB Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [xfs]


  Powered by Linux