Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 25 May 2006 17:53:15 -0400
From:      Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
To:        Eric Anderson <anderson@centtech.com>
Cc:        freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
Subject:   Re: Access to UFS stuck during snapshot.
Message-ID:  <20060525215314.GA31540@xor.obsecurity.org>
In-Reply-To: <44744EF8.2000000@centtech.com>
References:  <4473FA8F.6050102@outblaze.com> <20060524061848.GA58522@xor.obsecurity.org> <44744EF8.2000000@centtech.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--BOKacYhQ+x31HxR3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 07:18:00AM -0500, Eric Anderson wrote:
> Kris Kennaway wrote:
> >On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 02:17:51PM +0800, Kent Ho wrote:
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>I having problems accessing file system during snapshot runs.  snapshot=
=20
> >>takes approximately 10 to 20 mins to run.
> >>
> >>During that time access to files in the file system are blocked until=
=20
> >>the snapshot has completed.  Lot of processes was stuck and piles up on=
=20
> >>the fs.
> >>
> >>This fs stores mailboxes and it's accessed 24/7.  This is similar to=20
> >>what described in this thread.
> >>
> >>http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=3D14968+0+/usr/local/www/db=
/text/2006/freebsd-fs/20060312.freebsd-fs
> >>
> >>Has this been improved or fixed in recent releases, I see a bunch of=20
> >>fixes in march?  any possible work around?  any alternatives or=20
> >>recommendations?  Looking for high availability fs with snapshots.
> >
> >It's by design.
> >
> >Kris
>=20
> I found that making the .snap directories permissions 0700, and then=20
> making a subdirectory under the .snap that stores the actual snapshots=20
> helped, as long as I did not make any stat() calls to the snapshot file=
=20
> that was in snaplk state.
>=20
> Kris - you've had your head deep in the snapshot spaghetti recently - is=
=20
> this blocking just a matter of the locking on the snapshot file and a=20
> stat() call blocking on it, which causes an upward locking to the root=20
> dir of the filesystem?  Could this be avoided by 'hiding' the snapshot=20
> file while a snapshot is in progress?  I have been tinkering with hiding=
=20
> the snapshot directory during snapshot creation, but I don't have any=20
> results of anything yet, still too early.  I'm a wannabe hacker, so my=20
> progress is slow.

No, I/O is suspended while the snapshot is being created.  As I said,
it's a design limitation.

Kris

--BOKacYhQ+x31HxR3
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFEdidKWry0BWjoQKURAjlZAJ9KPtP0FOBiV/F+JtnqfHZitSS1gACglL+T
aqnKfcAMTqJBsFoqdNbjb0Y=
=O6BU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--BOKacYhQ+x31HxR3--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060525215314.GA31540>