From: Daira Hopwood Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 23:05:39 +0000 (+0100) Subject: Move sections around again. X-Git-Url: https://git.rkrishnan.org/webform_css?a=commitdiff_plain;h=963b797a745b122790847ed1973b6f55359dac55;p=tahoe-lafs%2Ftahoe-lafs.git Move sections around again. 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 67cd2531..b48c994c 100644 --- a/docs/proposed/magic-folder/remote-to-local-sync.rst +++ b/docs/proposed/magic-folder/remote-to-local-sync.rst @@ -308,161 +308,6 @@ and the filename patterns we use in the actual implementation may differ. -Fire Dragons: Distinguishing conflicts from overwrites -'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' - -It is necessary to distinguish between overwrites, in which the -remote side was aware of your most recent version and overwrote it -with a new version, and conflicts, in which the remote side was -unaware of your most recent version when it published its new version. -Those two cases have to be handled differently — the latter needs to -be raised to the user as an issue the user will have to resolve and -the former must not bother the user. - -For example, suppose that Alice's Magic Folder client sees a change -to ``foo`` in Bob's DMD. If the version it downloads from Bob's DMD -is "based on" the version currently in Alice's local filesystem at -the time Alice's client attempts to perform the write of the -downloaded file, then it is an overwrite. Otherwise it is initially -classified as a conflict. Note that, as explained below in the -`Earth Dragons`_ section, we may reclassify an overwrite as a -conflict if an error occurs during the write procedure. - -.. _`Earth Dragons`: #earth-dragons-collisions-between-local-filesystem-operations-and-downloads - -In order to implement this policy, we need to specify how the -"based on" relation between file versions is recorded and updated. - -We propose to record this information: - * in the `magic folder db`_, for local files; - * in the Tahoe-LAFS directory metadata, for files stored in the - Magic Folder. - -In the magic folder db we will add a *last-downloaded record*, -consisting of ``last_downloaded_uri`` and ``last_downloaded_timestamp`` -fields, for each path stored in the database. Whenever a Magic Folder -client downloads a file and writes it to that path as a successful -overwrite, it stores the downloaded version's URI and the current -local timestamp in this record. (Since only immutable files are used, -the URI will be an immutable file URI, which is deterministically -and uniquely derived from the file contents and the Tahoe-LAFS node's -`convergence secret`_.) - -When a download is a conflict, the client does not create a -last-downloaded record in its magic folder db. - -.. _`convergence secret`: https://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/browser/docs/convergence-secret.rst - -Later, in response to a local filesystem change at a given path, the -Magic Folder client reads the last-downloaded record associated with -that path (if any) from the database and then uploads the current file. -When it links the uploaded file into its client DMD, it includes -metadata containing the fields of the last-downloaded record in the -directory entry, overwriting any existing such metadata. If there was -no last-downloaded record associated with the path, these fields are -omitted. - -Note that ``last_downloaded_uri`` field does *not* record the URI of -the uploaded file (which would be redundant); it records the URI of -the last download before the change that caused the upload. Both -last-downloaded fields will be absent if the file has only ever been -changed by the client that first created it. - -We first describe a slightly simplified variant of the proposed -design: - - When Alice's Magic Folder client sees a remote change, say under - the DMD for Bob's client, it compares the ``last_downloaded_uri`` - in the metadata for the downloaded file, with the URI that Alice's - client last uploaded (in the ``filecap`` field of the ``caps`` table - of the magic folder db). - - If Alice has no local copy of the file, then this download is - initially classified as an overwrite. - - Otherwise, if there is no ``last_downloaded_uri`` field in the - metadata, then this download is initially classified as a conflict. - - Otherwise, suppose that these URIs are the same, *and* there has - been no local change to the file in Alice's filesystem since her - client's last upload. In that case, we know that Bob's Magic Folder - client had written Alice's current version of the file to Bob's - filesystem before Bob's change. Therefore, the download by Alice's - client is initially classified as an overwrite. - - In all other cases, the download is initially classed as a - conflict. - -The full variant also takes into account the ``last_downloaded_timestamp`` -field: - - The purpose of including the timestamp is to allow calculating the - length of time between the last download (in this case by Bob's client) - and the upload. If this is very short, then we are uncertain about - whether the process (on Bob's system) that wrote the local file took - into account the last download; we can use that information to be - conservative about treating changes as conflicts. - - Specifically, when a Magic Folder client detects a local change for - a given path and reads the corresponding last-downloaded record, and - the ``last_downloaded_timestamp`` shows that the download was more - recent than a given threshold (perhaps controlled by a configuration - parameter), then it omits the last-downloaded fields from the metadata. - This will cause any other client to treat the change as a conflict - if it already had a copy of the file. - -The `Earth Dragons`_ section below describes how to write a downloaded -file to the local filesystem, given an initial classification of the -download as an overwrite or conflict. - - -Water Dragons: Resolving conflict loops -''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' - -suppose that we've detected a remote write to file 'foo' that conflicts -with a local write -(alice is the local user that has detected the conflict, and bob is the -user who did the remote write) - -alice's gateway creates a 'foo.conflict_by_bob_at_timestamp' file -alice-the-human at some point notices the conflict and updates hir copy -of 'foo' to take into account bob's writes - -but, there is no way to know whether that update actually took into -account 'foo.conflict_by_bob_at_timestamp' or not -alice could have failed to notice 'foo.conflict_by_bob_at_timestamp' at -all, and just saved hir copy of 'foo' again -so, when there is another remote write, how do we know whether it should -be treated as a conflict or not? -well, alice could delete or rename 'foo.conflict_by_bob_at_timestamp' in -order to indicate that ze'd taken it into account. but I'm not sure about -the usability properties of that -the issue is whether, after 'foo.conflict_by_bob_at_timestamp' has been -written, alice's magic folder db should be updated to indicate (for the -purpose of conflict detection) that ze has seen bob's version of 'foo' -so, I think that alice's magic folder db should *not* be updated to -indicate ze has seen bob's version of 'foo'. in that case, when ze -updates hir local copy of 'foo' (with no suffix), the metadata of the -copy of 'foo' that hir client uploads will indicate only that it was -based on the previous version of 'foo'. then when bob gets that copy, it -will be treated as a conflict and called -'foo.conflict_by_alice_at_timestamp2' -which I think is the desired behaviour -oh, but then how do alice and bob exit the conflict loop? that's the -usability issue I was worried about [...] -if alice's client does update hir magic folder db, then bob will see hir -update as an overwrite -even though ze didn't necessarily take into account bob's changes -which seems wrong :-( -(bob's changes haven't been lost completely; they are still on alice's -filesystem. but they have been overwritten in bob's filesystem!) -so maybe we need alice to delete 'foo.conflict_by_bob_at_timestamp', and -use that as the signal that ze has seen bob's changes and to break the -conflict loop -(or rename it; actually any change to that file is sufficient to indicate -that alice has seen it) - - Earth Dragons: Collisions between local filesystem operations and downloads ''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' @@ -726,6 +571,164 @@ because another process wrote ``foo.conflicted_unique`` after we chose the filename, then we retry with a different filename. +Fire Dragons: Distinguishing conflicts from overwrites +'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' + +When synchronizing a file that has changed remotely, the Magic Folder +client needs to distinguish between overwrites, in which the remote +side was aware of your most recent version and overwrote it with a +new version, and conflicts, in which the remote side was unaware of +your most recent version when it published its new version. Those two +cases have to be handled differently — the latter needs to be raised +to the user as an issue the user will have to resolve and the former +must not bother the user. + +For example, suppose that Alice's Magic Folder client sees a change +to ``foo`` in Bob's DMD. If the version it downloads from Bob's DMD +is "based on" the version currently in Alice's local filesystem at +the time Alice's client attempts to write the downloaded file, then +it is an overwrite. Otherwise it is initially classified as a +conflict. + +This initial classification is used by the procedure for writing a +file described in the `Earth Dragons`_ section above. As explained +in that section, we may reclassify an overwrite as a conflict if an +error occurs during the write procedure. + +.. _`Earth Dragons`: #earth-dragons-collisions-between-local-filesystem-operations-and-downloads + +In order to implement this policy, we need to specify how the +"based on" relation between file versions is recorded and updated. + +We propose to record this information: + * in the `magic folder db`_, for local files; + * in the Tahoe-LAFS directory metadata, for files stored in the + Magic Folder. + +In the magic folder db we will add a *last-downloaded record*, +consisting of ``last_downloaded_uri`` and ``last_downloaded_timestamp`` +fields, for each path stored in the database. Whenever a Magic Folder +client downloads a file and writes it to that path as a successful +overwrite, it stores the downloaded version's URI and the current +local timestamp in this record. (Since only immutable files are used, +the URI will be an immutable file URI, which is deterministically +and uniquely derived from the file contents and the Tahoe-LAFS node's +`convergence secret`_.) + +When a download is a conflict (either initially or by reclassification), +the client does not create a last-downloaded record in its magic +folder db. + +.. _`convergence secret`: https://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/browser/docs/convergence-secret.rst + +Later, in response to a local filesystem change at a given path, the +Magic Folder client reads the last-downloaded record associated with +that path (if any) from the database and then uploads the current +file. When it links the uploaded file into its client DMD, it +includes the ``last_downloaded_uri`` field in the metadata of the +directory entry, overwriting any existing field of that name. If +there was no last-downloaded record associated with the path, this +field is omitted. + +Note that ``last_downloaded_uri`` field does *not* record the URI of +the uploaded file (which would be redundant); it records the URI of +the last download before the change that caused the upload. The field +will be absent if the file has only ever been changed by the client +that first created it. + +A possible refinement also takes into account the +``last_downloaded_timestamp`` field from the magic folder db, and +compares it to the timestamp of the change that caused the upload +(which should be later, assuming no system clock changes). +If the duration between these timestamps is very short, then we +are uncertain about whether the process on Bob's system that wrote +the local file could have taken into account the last download. +We can use this information to be conservative about treating +changes as conflicts. So, if the duration is less than a configured +threshold, we omit the ``last_downloaded_uri`` field from the +metadata. This will have the effect of making other clients treat +this change as a conflict whenever they already have a copy of the +file. + +Now we are ready to describe the algorithm for determining whether a +download for the file ``foo`` is an overwrite or a conflict (refining +step 2 of the procedure from the `Earth Dragons`_ section). + +Let ``last_downloaded_uri`` be the field of that name obtained from +the directory entry metadata for ``foo`` in Bob's DMD (this field +may be absent). Then the algorithm is: + +2a. If Alice has no local copy of ``foo``, classify as an overwrite. + +2b. Otherwise, "stat" ``foo`` to get its *current statinfo* (size + in bytes, ``mtime``, and ``ctime``). + +2c. Read the following information for the path ``foo`` from the + local magic folder db: + * the *last-uploaded statinfo*, if any (this is the size in + bytes, ``mtime``, and ``ctime`` stored in the ``local_files`` + table when the file was last uploaded); + * the ``filecap`` field of the ``caps`` table for this file, + which is the URI under which the file was last uploaded. + Call this ``last_uploaded_uri``. + +2d. If any of the following are true, then classify as a conflict: + * there are pending notifications of changes to ``foo``; + * the last-uploaded statinfo is either absent, or different + from the current statinfo; + * either ``last_downloaded_uri`` or ``last_uploaded_uri`` + (or both) are absent, or they are different. + + Otherwise, classify as an overwrite. + + +Water Dragons: Resolving conflict loops +''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' + +suppose that we've detected a remote write to file 'foo' that conflicts +with a local write +(alice is the local user that has detected the conflict, and bob is the +user who did the remote write) + +alice's gateway creates a 'foo.conflict_by_bob_at_timestamp' file +alice-the-human at some point notices the conflict and updates hir copy +of 'foo' to take into account bob's writes + +but, there is no way to know whether that update actually took into +account 'foo.conflict_by_bob_at_timestamp' or not +alice could have failed to notice 'foo.conflict_by_bob_at_timestamp' at +all, and just saved hir copy of 'foo' again +so, when there is another remote write, how do we know whether it should +be treated as a conflict or not? +well, alice could delete or rename 'foo.conflict_by_bob_at_timestamp' in +order to indicate that ze'd taken it into account. but I'm not sure about +the usability properties of that +the issue is whether, after 'foo.conflict_by_bob_at_timestamp' has been +written, alice's magic folder db should be updated to indicate (for the +purpose of conflict detection) that ze has seen bob's version of 'foo' +so, I think that alice's magic folder db should *not* be updated to +indicate ze has seen bob's version of 'foo'. in that case, when ze +updates hir local copy of 'foo' (with no suffix), the metadata of the +copy of 'foo' that hir client uploads will indicate only that it was +based on the previous version of 'foo'. then when bob gets that copy, it +will be treated as a conflict and called +'foo.conflict_by_alice_at_timestamp2' +which I think is the desired behaviour +oh, but then how do alice and bob exit the conflict loop? that's the +usability issue I was worried about [...] +if alice's client does update hir magic folder db, then bob will see hir +update as an overwrite +even though ze didn't necessarily take into account bob's changes +which seems wrong :-( +(bob's changes haven't been lost completely; they are still on alice's +filesystem. but they have been overwritten in bob's filesystem!) +so maybe we need alice to delete 'foo.conflict_by_bob_at_timestamp', and +use that as the signal that ze has seen bob's changes and to break the +conflict loop +(or rename it; actually any change to that file is sufficient to indicate +that alice has seen it) + + Read/download collisions ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~