Fixes a non-negligible performance regression from commit
7f394c807b
While we skip known-verified chunks in the stat-and-inode-sort loop,
those are only the ones from previous indexes. If there's a repeated
chunk in one index they would get re-verified more often as required.
So, add the check again explicitly to the read+verify loop.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
before reading the chunks from disk in the order of the index file,
stat them first and sort them by inode number.
this can have a very positive impact on read speed on spinning disks,
even with the additional stat'ing of the chunks.
memory footprint should be tolerable, for 1_000_000 chunks
we need about ~16MiB of memory (Vec of 64bit position + 64bit inode)
(assuming 4MiB Chunks, such an index would reference 4TiB of data)
two small benchmarks (single spinner, ext4) here showed an improvement from
~430 seconds to ~330 seconds for a 32GiB fixed index
and from
~160 seconds to ~120 seconds for a 10GiB dynamic index
Signed-off-by: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
found and semi-manually replaced by using:
codespell -L mut -L crate -i 3 -w
Mostly in comments, but also email notification and two occurrences
of misspelled 'reserved' struct member, which where not used and
cargo build did not complain about the change, soo ...
Signed-off-by: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
we will reuse that later in the client, so we need it somewhere
we can use from there
Signed-off-by: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
[add strongly typed ArchiveEntry and put api code into helpers.rs]
Signed-off-by: Stefan Reiter <s.reiter@proxmox.com>
with the fix for #2909 (improving handling missing chunks), we
changed from bailing to warning during a garbage collection when
updating the atime of a chunk.
but, updating the atime can not only fail when the chunk is missing,
but also on other occasions, e.g. no permissions or more importantly,
no space left on the device. in that case, the atime of a valid and used
chunk cannot be updated, and the second sweep of the gc will remove that chunk.
[0] is a real world example of that happening.
instead, only warn on really missin chunks, and bail on all other
errors.
0: https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/pbs-server-full-two-days-later-almost-empty.83274/
Signed-off-by: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
all the verify methods pass along the following:
- task worker
- datastore
- corrupt and verified chunks
might as well pull that out into a common type, with the added bonus of
now having a single point for construction instead of copying the
default capacaties in three different modules..
Signed-off-by: Fabian Grünbichler <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
the error message don't make sense with an empty default
Signed-off-by: Fabian Grünbichler <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
Signed-off-by: Wolfgang Bumiller <w.bumiller@proxmox.com>
chunk_stream one can be collapsed, since split == split_to with at set
to buffer.len() anyway.
Signed-off-by: Fabian Grünbichler <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
Signed-off-by: Wolfgang Bumiller <w.bumiller@proxmox.com>
instead of just logging the error. this should never happen in practice
unless someone is messing with the keyfile, in which case, it's better
to abort.
update tests accordingly (wrong fingerprint should fail, no fingerprint
should get the expected one).
Signed-off-by: Fabian Grünbichler <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
the RSA key and the encryption key itself are hard-coded to avoid
stalling the test runs because of lack of entropy, they have no special
significance otherwise.
Signed-off-by: Fabian Grünbichler <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
this fixes the issue that on some filesystems, you cannot recursively
remove a directory when you hold a lock on a file inside (e.g. nfs/cifs)
it is not really backwards compatible (so during an upgrade, there
could be two daemons have the lock), but since the locking was
broken before (see previous patch) it should not really matter
(also it seems very unlikely that someone will trigger this)
Signed-off-by: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
'lock_manifest' returns a Result<File, Error> so we always got the result,
even when we did not get the lock, but we acted like we had.
bubble the locking error up
Signed-off-by: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
Thomas Lamprecht
Dominik Csapak
Fabian Grünbichler
Dietmar Maurer
Wolfgang Bumiller