167 lines
6.6 KiB
ReStructuredText
167 lines
6.6 KiB
ReStructuredText
.. _tech_design_overview:
|
|
|
|
Technical Overview
|
|
==================
|
|
|
|
Datastores
|
|
----------
|
|
|
|
A Datastore is the logical place where :ref:`Backup Snapshots
|
|
<backup_snapshot>` and their chunks are stored. Snapshots consist of a
|
|
manifest, blobs, dynamic- and fixed-indexes (see :ref:`terminology`), and are
|
|
stored in the following directory structure:
|
|
|
|
<datastore-root>/<type>/<id>/<time>/
|
|
|
|
The deduplication of datastores is based on reusing chunks, which are
|
|
referenced by the indexes in a backup snapshot. This means that multiple
|
|
indexes can reference the same chunks, reducing the amount of space needed to
|
|
contain the data (even across backup snapshots).
|
|
|
|
Chunks
|
|
------
|
|
|
|
A chunk is some (possibly encrypted) data with a CRC-32 checksum at the end and
|
|
a type marker at the beginning. It is identified by the SHA-256 checksum of its
|
|
content.
|
|
|
|
To generate such chunks, backup data is split either into fixed-size or
|
|
dynamically sized chunks. The same content will be hashed to the same checksum.
|
|
|
|
The chunks of a datastore are found in
|
|
|
|
<datastore-root>/.chunks/
|
|
|
|
This chunk directory is further subdivided by the first four byte of the chunks
|
|
checksum, so the chunk with the checksum
|
|
|
|
a342e8151cbf439ce65f3df696b54c67a114982cc0aa751f2852c2f7acc19a8b
|
|
|
|
lives in
|
|
|
|
<datastore-root>/.chunks/a342/
|
|
|
|
This is done to reduce the number of files per directory, as having many files
|
|
per directory can be bad for file system performance.
|
|
|
|
These chunk directories ('0000'-'ffff') will be preallocated when a datastore
|
|
is created.
|
|
|
|
Fixed-sized Chunks
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
|
|
|
For block based backups (like VMs), fixed-sized chunks are used. The content
|
|
(disk image), is split into chunks of the same length (typically 4 MiB).
|
|
|
|
This works very well for VM images, since the file system on the guest most
|
|
often tries to allocate files in contiguous pieces, so new files get new
|
|
blocks, and changing existing files changes only their own blocks.
|
|
|
|
As an optimization, VMs in `Proxmox VE`_ can make use of 'dirty bitmaps', which
|
|
can track the changed blocks of an image. Since these bitmap are also a
|
|
representation of the image split into chunks, there is a direct relation
|
|
between dirty blocks of the image and chunks which need to get uploaded, so
|
|
only modified chunks of the disk have to be uploaded for a backup.
|
|
|
|
Since the image is always split into chunks of the same size, unchanged blocks
|
|
will result in identical checksums for those chunks, so such chunks do not need
|
|
to be backed up again. This way storage snapshots are not needed to find the
|
|
changed blocks.
|
|
|
|
For consistency, `Proxmox VE`_ uses a QEMU internal snapshot mechanism, that
|
|
does not rely on storage snapshots either.
|
|
|
|
Dynamically sized Chunks
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
|
|
|
If one does not want to backup block-based systems but rather file-based
|
|
systems, using fixed-sized chunks is not a good idea, since every time a file
|
|
would change in size, the remaining data gets shifted around and this would
|
|
result in many chunks changing, reducing the amount of deduplication.
|
|
|
|
To improve this, `Proxmox Backup`_ Server uses dynamically sized chunks
|
|
instead. Instead of splitting an image into fixed sizes, it first generates a
|
|
consistent file archive (:ref:`pxar <pxar-format>`) and uses a rolling hash
|
|
over this on-the-fly generated archive to calculate chunk boundaries.
|
|
|
|
We use a variant of Buzhash which is a cyclic polynomial algorithm. It works
|
|
by continuously calculating a checksum while iterating over the data, and on
|
|
certain conditions it triggers a hash boundary.
|
|
|
|
Assuming that most files of the system that is to be backed up have not
|
|
changed, eventually the algorithm triggers the boundary on the same data as a
|
|
previous backup, resulting in chunks that can be reused.
|
|
|
|
Encrypted Chunks
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
|
|
|
Encrypted chunks are a special case. Both fixed- and dynamically sized chunks
|
|
can be encrypted, and they are handled in a slightly different manner than
|
|
normal chunks.
|
|
|
|
The hashes of encrypted chunks are calculated not with the actual (encrypted)
|
|
chunk content, but with the plaintext content concatenated with the encryption
|
|
key. This way, two chunks of the same data encrypted with different keys
|
|
generate two different checksums and no collisions occur for multiple
|
|
encryption keys.
|
|
|
|
This is done to speed up the client part of the backup, since it only needs to
|
|
encrypt chunks that are actually getting uploaded. Chunks that exist already in
|
|
the previous backup, do not need to be encrypted and uploaded.
|
|
|
|
Caveats and Limitations
|
|
-----------------------
|
|
|
|
Notes on hash collisions
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
|
|
|
Every hashing algorithm has a chance to produce collisions, meaning two (or
|
|
more) inputs generate the same checksum. For SHA-256, this chance is
|
|
negligible. To calculate such a collision, one can use the ideas of the
|
|
'birthday problem' from probability theory. For big numbers, this is actually
|
|
infeasible to calculate with regular computers, but there is a good
|
|
approximation:
|
|
|
|
.. math::
|
|
|
|
p(n, d) = 1 - e^{-n^2/(2d)}
|
|
|
|
Where `n` is the number of tries, and `d` is the number of possibilities.
|
|
For a concrete example lets assume a large datastore of 1 PiB, and an average
|
|
chunk size of 4 MiB. That means :math:`n = 268435456` tries, and :math:`d =
|
|
2^{256}` possibilities. Inserting those values in the formula from earlier you
|
|
will see that the probability of a collision in that scenario is:
|
|
|
|
.. math::
|
|
|
|
3.1115 * 10^{-61}
|
|
|
|
For context, in a lottery game of guessing 6 out of 45, the chance to correctly
|
|
guess all 6 numbers is only :math:`1.2277 * 10^{-7}`, that means the chance of
|
|
collission is about the same as winning 13 such lotto games *in a row*.
|
|
|
|
In conclusion, it is extremely unlikely that such a collision would occur by
|
|
accident in a normal datastore.
|
|
|
|
Additionally, SHA-256 is prone to length extension attacks, but since there is
|
|
an upper limit for how big the chunk are, this is not a problem, since a
|
|
potential attacker cannot arbitrarily add content to the data beyond that
|
|
limit.
|
|
|
|
File-based Backup
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
|
|
|
Since dynamically sized chunks (for file-based backups) are created on a custom
|
|
archive format (pxar) and not over the files directly, there is no relation
|
|
between files and the chunks. This means that the Proxmox Backup client has to
|
|
read all files again for every backup, otherwise it would not be possible to
|
|
generate a consistent independent pxar archive where the original chunks can be
|
|
reused. Note that there will be still only new or change chunks be uploaded.
|
|
|
|
Verification of encrypted chunks
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
|
|
|
For encrypted chunks, only the checksum of the original (plaintext) data is
|
|
available, making it impossible for the server (without the encryption key), to
|
|
verify its content against it. Instead only the CRC-32 checksum gets checked.
|