Hi, On IRC, the idea of a command to explicitly purge all caches came up, which I rephrase here so it does not get lost.
The idea is that when a corrupt repository is replaced by a backup "in place", the contents of the backup might be slightly outdated (the latest revisions are missing), and so the caches of the processes has to be purged. There are several aspects: - signal long running svn processes (svnserve, mod_dav_svn) to purge their caches. - prevent short running processes (svnadmin) from using any external caches (memcached). - purging memcached caches. Best regards Markus Schaber -- ___________________________ We software Automation. 3S-Smart Software Solutions GmbH Markus Schaber | Developer Memminger Str. 151 | 87439 Kempten | Germany | Tel. +49-831-54031-0 | Fax +49-831-54031-50 Email: m.scha...@3s-software.com | Web: http://www.3s-software.com CoDeSys internet forum: http://forum.3s-software.com Download CoDeSys sample projects: http://www.3s-software.com/index.shtml?sample_projects Managing Directors: Dipl.Inf. Dieter Hess, Dipl.Inf. Manfred Werner | Trade register: Kempten HRB 6186 | Tax ID No.: DE 167014915 -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Daniel Shahaf [mailto:danie...@elego.de] Gesendet: Dienstag, 28. Februar 2012 09:31 An: dev@subversion.apache.org Cc: comm...@subversion.apache.org Betreff: Re: svn commit: r1294479 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/fs_fs.c danie...@apache.org wrote on Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 06:23:29 -0000: > Author: danielsh > Date: Tue Feb 28 06:23:28 2012 > New Revision: 1294479 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1294479&view=rev > Log: > Check for issue #4129 (bogus predecessor fields in the root > node-revision) in 'svnadmin verify'. > > Notes: > > - This check precedes all the other non-backend-specific check. A subsequent > revision will address that. > > - Interaction with FSFS caches: see comment within. > ... > @@ -7919,6 +7923,48 @@ svn_fs_fs__verify(svn_fs_t *fs, > cancel_func, cancel_baton, > pool)); > > + /* Issue #4129: bogus pred-counts on the root node-rev. */ { > + svn_revnum_t i; > + int predecessor_predecessor_count = -1; > + > + for (i = 0; i <= youngest; i++) > + { > + /* ### Caching. > + > + svn_fs_fs__rev_get_root() consults caches, which in verify we > + don't want. But we can't easily bypass that, as > + svn_fs_revision_root()+svn_fs_node_id()'s implementation uses > + svn_fs_fs__rev_get_root() too. > + > + ### A future revision will make fs_verify() disable caches when it > + ### opens ffd. Having had another look at this, I'm not sure to what extent that is necessary. --- All caches live in fs_fs_data_t. The cache prefix embeds the UUID and the OS path to the filesystem root (/srv/svn/repos/calc/db, or so) (see svn_fs_fs__initialize_caches()). The cache types are three: 'inprocess', 'membuffer', or 'memcache'. The first two are per-process, but the third need not be. The net result of all this is that verify() cannot be sure that, if it got a cached data, it is a cache of information computed from the repository it is interrogating: in memcache situations the information may have been installed in the cache by another memcache client (running on a different box), and even in in-process situations the following scenario would invalidate the cache: % svnadmin dump repos > backup.dump % vi repos % svnadmin is-repos-corrupt repos yes % svnadmin create repos2 % svnadmin load -q repos2 < backup.dump % mv repos rm && mv repos2 repos (And no, I don't think it's contrived. I imagine that's a fairly common thing to do --- to restore a backup repository to its original name.) --- So, I'm debating between: - Disable all caches in svn_fs_verify(). - Disable memcached caches in svn_fs_verify(). - None of the above, but document that users of svn_fs_verify() should disable caches. (And do that in libsvn_repos and/or 'svnadmin verify', too.) Thoughts? > + */ > + svn_fs_id_t *root_id; > + node_revision_t *root_noderev; > + > + if ((i % 100) == 0) /* uneducated guess */ > + svn_pool_clear(iterpool); > + > + /* Fetch ROOT_NODEREV. */ > + SVN_ERR(svn_fs_fs__rev_get_root(&root_id, fs, i, iterpool)); > + SVN_ERR(svn_fs_fs__get_node_revision(&root_noderev, fs, root_id, > + iterpool)); > + > + /* Check correctness. (Compare validate_root_noderev().) */ > + if (1+predecessor_predecessor_count != > root_noderev->predecessor_count) > + return svn_error_createf(SVN_ERR_FS_CORRUPT, NULL, > + _("predecessor count for " > + "the root node-revision is wrong: " > + "r%ld has %d, but r%ld has %d"), > + i, root_noderev->predecessor_count, > + i-1, > + predecessor_predecessor_count); > + > + predecessor_predecessor_count = root_noderev->predecessor_count; > + } > + } > + > + svn_pool_destroy(iterpool); > return SVN_NO_ERROR; > } > > >
