Manual physical snapshots start additional snapshot and retention schedulers

Offen
  • Stimmt etwas nicht?
#403 0 Kommentare 0 Reaktionen 0 zugewiesene Personen Auf GitHub ansehen

Dieses Issue hat noch niemand übernommen.

Bewertung

Schwierigkeit
4/5
Geschätzter Aufwand
3-5 Tage
Anfängerfreundlichkeit
45/100
Issue-Typ
Bug
Klarheit
Klar beschrieben
Aktivitätsstatus
Aktiv
Tech-Stack
go, postgresql
Bereich
backend, databases

Rechercherichtung

Read engine/internal/srv/routes.go and engine/internal/retrieval/retrieval.go around the named createSnapshot and SnapshotData paths, then inspect engine/internal/retrieval/engine/postgres/snapshot/physical.go for scheduler startup and lifecycle. Reproduce the reported sequence of startup followed by four manual requests and observe scheduled callbacks. Done means manual snapshots do not add recurring schedulers, and snapshot and retention jobs run once per pool with operations coordinated.

Vom Indexierungsmodell aus dem Issue-Text verfasst.

Beschreibung

While testing physical snapshots on DBLab Engine v4.2.0, I noticed that each manual POST /snapshot request starts another recurring scheduler. After four manual snapshots, the scheduled snapshot and retention jobs run five times instead of once.

I also reproduced the scheduler behavior against the v4.2.2 retrieval code in an isolated Go test. That test skipped storage operations; it was not a full v4.2.2 database restore test.

Steps to reproduce

  1. Start an engine with a ZFS pool and physicalRestore / physicalSnapshot configured.

  2. Enable scheduled snapshots and retention. For example, this is the relevant configuration section:

    retrieval:
  jobs: [physicalRestore, physicalSnapshot]
  spec:
    physicalSnapshot:
      options:
        scheduler:
          snapshot:
            timetable: "0 * * * *"
          retention:
            timetable: "30 * * * *"
            limit: 2

  3. Wait for initialization to finish, then request four manual snapshots sequentially, letting each request finish before starting the next. For a pool named test_pool:

    curl --fail-with-body --request POST \
  --header 'Verification-Token: <token>' \
  --header 'Content-Type: application/json' \
  --data '{"poolName":"test_pool"}' \
  http://127.0.0.1:2345/snapshot

  4. Check the logs at the next scheduled snapshot and retention times.

Actual behavior

  • Startup logs Snapshot scheduler has been started once. Each manual request adds another occurrence, without stopping the previous scheduler.
  • After four manual requests, five snapshot jobs start at the scheduled time. One succeeds; the others collide with it and report that the dataset already exists.
  • The retention callbacks also run concurrently against the same targets. I observed dataset is busy errors during these overlapping cleanup attempts.

The isolated test exercised the real SnapshotData and scheduler startup path. The number of active schedulers increased from 1 -> 2 -> 3 -> 4 -> 5, and callbacks from all five fired. Cancelling the startup context stopped only the first scheduler; the four created with context.Background() continued running. The test explicitly stopped all schedulers afterward.

Expected behavior

A manual snapshot should take one snapshot without adding another recurring schedule. Scheduled snapshot creation and retention should continue running once per pool, with manual and scheduled operations coordinated.

Relevant code

  • createSnapshot calls SnapshotData(context.Background(), poolName).
  • SnapshotData constructs new jobs and replaces statefulJobs without stopping the previous jobs.
  • PhysicalInitial.Run starts a scheduler on return. Each instance registers both snapshot and retention callbacks and has its own mutex, so the instances do not serialize their operations with each other.

Workaround

Restarting the engine clears the extra schedulers. Avoiding manual POST /snapshot requests afterward prevents them from accumulating again.

Vorherrschende Sprache
Go
Sterne
2.8k
Forks
90
Keine gemergten PRs in 30 T.

Entwicklungsumgebung

Erste Schritte

  1. Lesen Sie das ganze Issue und danach den Beitragsleitfaden des Projekts.
  2. Schreiben Sie ins Issue, dass Sie es übernehmen — das erspart doppelte Arbeit.
  3. Forken Sie das Repository und arbeiten Sie in einem Branch.
  4. Öffnen Sie einen Pull Request, der die Issue-Nummer nennt.

Mehr aus postgres-ai/database-lab-engine

Alle Issues in postgres-ai/database-lab-engine

Ähnliche Issues

Weitere Issues zu Go

Neue Issues direkt in Ihr Postfach

Eine kurze Übersicht über anfängerfreundliche GitHub-Issues.