From: Daira Hopwood Date: Mon, 25 May 2015 20:42:47 +0000 (+0100) Subject: Work in progress. X-Git-Url: https://git.rkrishnan.org/vdrive/quickstart.html?a=commitdiff_plain;h=0cb124202c59882d11e0ab9ba888eee8adfd48ae;p=tahoe-lafs%2Ftahoe-lafs.git Work in progress. Signed-off-by: Daira Hopwood --- diff --git a/docs/proposed/magic-folder/remote-to-local-sync.rst b/docs/proposed/magic-folder/remote-to-local-sync.rst index b855ec1c..d169edf8 100644 --- a/docs/proposed/magic-folder/remote-to-local-sync.rst +++ b/docs/proposed/magic-folder/remote-to-local-sync.rst @@ -269,6 +269,10 @@ we classified various problems as "dragons", which as a convenient mnemonic we have named after the five classical Greek elements (Earth, Air, Water, Fire and Aether). +Note: all filenames used in the following sections are examples, +and the filename patterns we use in the actual implementation may +differ. + Earth Dragons: Write/download and read/download collisions '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' @@ -314,63 +318,174 @@ Our proposed design is as follows: The implementation of file replacement differs between Windows and Unix. On Unix, it can be implemented as follows: -a. Set the permissions of the replacement file to be the - same as the replaced file, bitwise-or'd with octal 600 - (``rw-------``). -b. Attempt to move the replaced file (``foo``) to the - backup filename (``foo.old``). -c. Attempt to create a hard link at the replaced filename - (``foo``) pointing to the replacement file (``.foo.tmp``). -d. Attempt to unlink the replacement file (``.foo.tmp``), - suppressing errors. +4a. Set the permissions of the replacement file to be the + same as the replaced file, bitwise-or'd with octal 600 + (``rw-------``). +4b. Attempt to move the replaced file (``foo``) to the + backup filename (``foo.old``). +4c. Attempt to create a hard link at the replaced filename + (``foo``) pointing to the replacement file (``.foo.tmp``). +4d. Attempt to unlink the replacement file (``.foo.tmp``), + suppressing errors. To reclassify as a conflict, attempt to rename ``.foo.tmp`` to ``foo.conflicted``, suppressing errors. Note that, if there is no conflict, the entry for ``foo`` recorded in the `magic folder db`_ will reflect the ``mtime`` -set in step 3. The link in step c will cause an ``IN_CREATE`` -event for ``foo``, but this will not trigger an upload, -because the metadata recorded in the database entry will -exactly match the metadata for the file's inode on disk. +set in step 3. The link operation in step 4c will cause an +``IN_CREATE`` event for ``foo``, but this will not trigger an +upload, because the metadata recorded in the database entry +will exactly match the metadata for the file's inode on disk. (The two hard links — ``foo`` and, while it still exists, ``.foo.tmp`` — share the same inode and therefore the same metadata.) .. _`magic folder db`: filesystem_integration.rst#local-scanning-and-database +[TODO: on Unix, what happens with reference to inotify events if we +rename a file while it is open? Does the path for the ``CLOSE_WRITE`` +event reflect the new name?] + On Windows, file replacement can be implemented as a single call to the `ReplaceFileW`_ API (with the ``REPLACEFILE_IGNORE_MERGE_ERRORS`` flag). Similar to the Unix case, the `ReplaceFileW`_ operation will -cause a change notification for ``foo``. The replaced ``foo`` -has the same ``mtime`` as the replacement file, and so this -notification will not trigger an upload. - -Note that ReplaceFileW is not atomic. The effect of this call -is to first move ``foo`` to ``foo.old``, then move ``.foo.tmp`` -to ``foo``. It is possible for there to be a failure between -these two moves, in which case the call will fail with return -code ``ERROR_UNABLE_TO_MOVE_REPLACEMENT_2``. However, it is -still preferable to use this API over two `MoveFileExW`_ calls, -because it retains the attributes and ACLs of ``foo`` where -possible. +cause a change notification for ``foo`` [TODO: check which +notifications we actually get]. The replaced ``foo`` has the +same ``mtime`` as the replacement file, and so this notification +will not trigger an unwanted upload. .. _`ReplaceFileW`: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa365512%28v=vs.85%29.aspx -.. _`MoveFileExW`: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa365240%28v=vs.85%29.aspx - -[TODO: on Unix, what happens with reference to inotify events if we -rename a file while it is open? Does the filename for the ``CLOSE_WRITE`` -event reflect the new name?] To determine whether this procedure adequately protects against data -loss, we need to consider what happens if another process has ``foo`` -open for writing: +loss, we need to consider what happens if another process attempts to +update ``foo``, for example by renaming ``foo.other`` to ``foo``. +This differs between Windows and Unix. + +On Unix, we need to consider all possible interleavings between the +operations performed by the Magic Folder client and the other process. +(Note that atomic operations on a directory are totally ordered.) + +* Interleaving A: the other process' rename precedes our rename in + step 4b, and we get an ``IN_MOVED_TO`` event for its rename by + step 2. Then we reclassify as a conflict; its changes end up at + ``foo`` and ours end up at ``foo.conflicted``. This avoids data + loss. + +* Interleaving B: its rename precedes ours in step 4b, and we do + not get an event for its rename by step 2. Its changes end up at + ``foo.old``, and ours end up at ``foo`` after being linked there + in step 4c. This avoids data loss. + +* Interleaving C: its rename happens between our rename in step 4b, + and our link operation in step 4c of the file replacement. The + latter fails with an ``EEXIST`` error because ``foo`` already + exists. We reclassify as a conflict; the old version ends up at + ``foo.old``, the other process' changes end up at ``foo``, and + ours at ``foo.conflicted``. This avoids data loss. + +* Interleaving D: its rename happens after our link in step 4c, + and causes an ``IN_MOVED_TO`` event for ``foo``. Its rename also + changes the ``mtime`` for ``foo`` so that it is different from + the ``mtime`` calculated in step 3, and therefore different + from the metadata recorded for ``foo`` in the magic folder db. + (Assuming no system clock changes, its rename will set an ``mtime`` + timestamp corresponding to a time after step 4c, which is not + equal to the timestamp *T* seconds before step 4a, provided that + *T* seconds is sufficiently greater than the timestamp granularity.) + Therefore, an upload will be triggered for ``foo`` after its + change, which is correct and avoids data loss. + +On Windows, the internal implementation of `ReplaceFileW`_ is similar +to what we have described above for Unix; it works like this: + +4a′. Copy metadata (which does not include ``mtime``) from the + replaced file (``foo``) to the replacement file (``.foo.tmp``). +4b′. Attempt to move the replaced file (``foo``) onto the + backup filename (``foo.old``), deleting the latter if it + already exists. +4c′. Attempt to move the replacement file (``.foo.tmp``) to the + replaced filename (``foo``); fail if the destination already + exists. + +Notice that this is essentially the same as the algorithm we use +for Unix, but steps 4c and 4d on Unix are combined into a single +step 4c′. (If there is a failure at steps 4c′ after step 4b′ has +completed, the `ReplaceFileW`_ call will fail with return code +``ERROR_UNABLE_TO_MOVE_REPLACEMENT_2``. However, it is still +preferable to use this API over two `MoveFileExW`_ calls, because +it retains the attributes and ACLs of ``foo`` where possible.) + +However, on Windows the other application will not be able to +directly rename ``foo.other`` onto ``foo`` (which would fail because +the destination already exists); it will have to rename or delete +``foo`` first. Without loss of generality, let's say ``foo`` is +deleted. This complicates the interleaving analysis, because we +have two operations done by the other process interleaving with +three done by the magic folder process (rather than one operation +interleaving with four as on Unix). The cases are: + +* Interleaving A′: the other process' deletion of ``foo`` and its + rename of ``foo.other`` to ``foo`` both precede our rename in + step 4b. We get an event corresponding to its rename by step 2. + Then we reclassify as a conflict; its changes end up at ``foo`` + and ours end up at ``foo.conflicted``. This avoids data loss. + +* Interleaving B′: the other process' deletion of ``foo`` and its + rename of ``foo.other`` to ``foo`` both precede our rename in + step 4b. We do not get an event for its rename by step 2. + Its changes end up at ``foo.old``, and ours end up at ``foo`` + after being linked there in step 4c. This avoids data loss. + +* Interleaving X′: the other process' deletion of ``foo`` precedes + our rename of ``foo`` to ``foo.old`` done by `ReplaceFileW`_, + but its rename of ``foo.other`` to ``foo`` does not, so we get + an ``ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND`` error from `ReplaceFileW`_ indicating + that the replaced file does not exist. Then we reclassify as a + conflict; the other process' changes end up at ``foo`` (after + it has renamed ``foo.other`` to ``foo``) and our changes end up + at ``foo.conflicted``. This avoids data loss. + +* Interleaving C′: its deletion happens during the call to + `ReplaceFileW`_, causing the latter to fail with an ... error. + We reclassify as a conflict; the old version ends up at + ``foo.old``, the other process' changes end up at ``foo``, and + ours at ``foo.conflicted``. This avoids data loss. + +* Interleaving D′: its rename happens after all internal operations + of `ReplaceFileW`_ have completed, and causes a corresponding event + for ``foo``. Its rename also changes the ``mtime`` for ``foo`` so + that it is different from the ``mtime`` calculated in step 3, and + therefore different from the metadata recorded for ``foo`` in the + magic folder db. (Assuming no system clock changes, its rename will + set an ``mtime`` timestamp corresponding to a time after the + internal operations of `ReplaceFileW`_ have completed, which is not + equal to the timestamp *T* seconds before `ReplaceFileW`_ is called, + provided that *T* seconds is sufficiently greater than the timestamp + granularity.) Therefore, an upload will be triggered for ``foo`` + after its change, which is correct and avoids data loss. + +[FIXME probably wrong +Because the steps on Windows correspond to those on Unix except +for combining two steps, the set of possible interleavings is a +subset of that on Unix. Therefore, the possible outcomes are also +a subset of those on Unix. (The possibility of ending up with two +links at ``foo`` and ``.foo.tmp`` is excluded. Also there is an +additional failure case where 4b′ fails because ``foo.old`` already +exists; this does not cause data loss.)] + +.. _`MoveFileExW`: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa365240%28v=vs.85%29.aspx + +We also need to consider what happens if another process opens ``foo`` +and writes to it directly, rather than renaming another file onto it: -* On Unix, open file handles refer to inodes, not paths. When the other - program closes the file, changes will have been written to the file - at the same inode, now linked at ``foo.old``. This avoids data loss. +* On Unix, open file handles refer to inodes, not paths. If the other + process opens ``foo`` before it has been renamed to ``foo.old``, + and then closes the file, changes will have been written to the file + at the same inode, even if that inode is now linked at ``foo.old``. + This avoids data loss. * On Windows, we have two subcases, depending on whether the sharing flags specified by the other process when it opened its file handle @@ -391,49 +506,14 @@ open for writing: .. _`CreateFile`: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa363858%28v=vs.85%29.aspx -[TODO: on Windows, what is the default sharing of a file opened for -writing by _open/_wopen?] - -We also need to consider what happens if another process attempts to -update ``foo`` by renaming another file, say ``foo.other``, onto it. -Again this differs between Windows and Unix: - -On Unix, we need to consider all possible interleavings between the -operations performed by the Magic Folder client and the other process. -(Note that atomic operations on a directory are totally ordered.) - -* Interleaving 1a: the other process' rename precedes our rename in - step b, and we get an ``IN_MOVED_TO`` event for its rename by step 2. - Then we reclassify as a conflict; its changes end up at ``foo`` - and ours end up at ``foo.conflicted``. This avoids data loss. -* Interleaving 1b: its rename precedes ours in step b, and we do - not get an ``IN_MOVED_TO`` event for its rename by step 2. Its - changes end up at ``foo.old`` and ours end up at ``foo``. This - avoids data loss. -* Interleaving 2: its rename happens between our rename in step b, - and our link operation in step c of the file replacement. The - latter fails with an ``EEXIST`` error because ``foo`` already - exists. We reclassify as a conflict; the old version ends up at - ``foo.old``, the other process' changes end up at ``foo``, and - ours at ``foo.conflicted``. This avoids data loss. -* Interleaving 3: its rename happens after our link in step c, and - causes an ``IN_MOVED_TO`` event for ``foo``. Its rename also changes - the ``mtime`` for ``foo`` so that it is different from the ``mtime`` - calculated in step a, and therefore different from the metadata - recorded for ``foo`` in the magic folder db. (Assuming no system - clock changes, its rename will set an ``mtime`` timestamp - corresponding to a time after step c, which is not equal to the - timestamp *T* seconds before step a, provided that *T* seconds - is sufficiently greater than the timestamp granularity.) - Therefore, an upload will be triggered for ``foo`` after its change, - which is correct and avoids data loss. - Note that it is possible that another process tries to open the file -between steps b and c. In this case the open will fail because ``foo`` -does not exist. Nevertheless, no data will be lost, and in many cases -the user will be able to retry the operation. +between steps 4b and 4c (or 4b′ and 4c′ on Windows). In this case the +open will fail because ``foo`` does not exist. Nevertheless, no data +will be lost, and in many cases the user will be able to retry the +operation. -On Windows, [TODO interleavings of rename vs ReplaceFileW]. +[TODO: on Windows, what is the default sharing of a file opened for +writing by _open/_wopen?] A *read/download collision* occurs when another program reads