Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

br: ebs volume snapshot backup and restore with flashback solution #38700

Merged
merged 23 commits into from
Nov 3, 2022

Conversation

fengou1
Copy link
Contributor

@fengou1 fengou1 commented Oct 28, 2022

What problem does this PR solve?

Adapts Flashback solution.

previously, BR delete the key from rocks DB to get transaction level consistency, however, there is a defect when the compaction filter gc started after the restore was done. the data consistency is broken. v6.3.0 take a workaround compaction during the restore, this is too heavy. the flashback solution is to try to rewrite the MVCC key with the latest ts, it is more effective during the restore compared to compaction.

Issue Number: close #36215

Problem Summary:

What is changed and how it works?

Check List

Tests

  • Unit test
  • Integration test
  • Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
  1. apply a tc yaml with recoveryMode:true
  2. apply a restore yaml with restoreMode: volume-snapshot
    JkcnPTCdPA
  3. do a admin checksum for all user tables
    Admin checksum show values are the same as backup's
  • No code

Side effects

  • Performance regression: Consumes more CPU
  • Performance regression: Consumes more Memory
  • Breaking backward compatibility

Documentation

  • Affects user behaviors
  • Contains syntax changes
  • Contains variable changes
  • Contains experimental features
  • Changes MySQL compatibility

Release note

Please refer to Release Notes Language Style Guide to write a quality release note.

None

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

ti-chi-bot commented Oct 28, 2022

[REVIEW NOTIFICATION]

This pull request has been approved by:

  • 3pointer
  • Defined2014

To complete the pull request process, please ask the reviewers in the list to review by filling /cc @reviewer in the comment.
After your PR has acquired the required number of LGTMs, you can assign this pull request to the committer in the list by filling /assign @committer in the comment to help you merge this pull request.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Reviewer can indicate their review by submitting an approval review.
Reviewer can cancel approval by submitting a request changes review.

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. do-not-merge/needs-triage-completed size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Oct 28, 2022
@fengou1
Copy link
Contributor Author

fengou1 commented Oct 28, 2022

/cc @3pointer

@fengou1 fengou1 self-assigned this Oct 28, 2022
@fengou1
Copy link
Contributor Author

fengou1 commented Oct 28, 2022

/run check-issue-triage-complete

br/pkg/restore/data.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
br/pkg/restore/data.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
br/pkg/restore/data.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
return errors.Trace(err)
}

recovery.progress.Inc()
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could get region count by rangetask.TaskStat in the prepare phase and show progress in FlashbackToVersion.


// restore tikv data from a snapshot volume
var totalRegions int

totalRegions, err = restore.RecoverData(ctx, resolveTs, allStores, mgr, progress)
totalRegions, err = restore.RecoverData(ctx, resolveTs, allStores, mgr, progress, restoreTS, cfg.Concurrency)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

it seems restoreTs > resolveTs. is it ok to stop gc at restoreTs?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

keep safe point in restoreTs is safe since GC never work before the TiDB node startup. The code may need a refactoring to remove the safepointkeeper service, however, I would like to remove it after a thorough test.

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. label Nov 2, 2022
Copy link
Contributor

@3pointer 3pointer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot removed the status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. label Nov 2, 2022
@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

This pull request has been accepted and is ready to merge.

Commit hash: e501d50

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. label Nov 3, 2022
@fengou1
Copy link
Contributor Author

fengou1 commented Nov 3, 2022

/run-check_dev

@fengou1
Copy link
Contributor Author

fengou1 commented Nov 3, 2022

/run-check_dev_2

@fengou1
Copy link
Contributor Author

fengou1 commented Nov 3, 2022

/run-check_dev

@fengou1
Copy link
Contributor Author

fengou1 commented Nov 3, 2022

/run-mysql-test

@fengou1 fengou1 requested a review from a team as a code owner November 3, 2022 06:45
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added size/XL Denotes a PR that changes 500-999 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Nov 3, 2022
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/XL Denotes a PR that changes 500-999 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Nov 3, 2022
@fengou1 fengou1 removed the request for review from a team November 3, 2022 07:25
@YuJuncen
Copy link
Contributor

YuJuncen commented Nov 3, 2022

/merge

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Member

This pull request has been accepted and is ready to merge.

Commit hash: e531b69

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot added the status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. label Nov 3, 2022
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot merged commit bd081f1 into pingcap:master Nov 3, 2022
@sre-bot
Copy link
Contributor

sre-bot commented Nov 3, 2022

TiDB MergeCI notify

🔴 Bad News! New failing [1] after this pr merged.
These new failed integration tests seem to be caused by the current PR, please try to fix these new failed integration tests, thanks!

CI Name Result Duration Compare with Parent commit
idc-jenkins-ci-tidb/integration-ddl-test 🟥 failed 1, success 5, total 6 25 min New failing
idc-jenkins-ci-tidb/common-test 🔴 failed 1, success 10, total 11 10 min Existing failure
idc-jenkins-ci-tidb/sqllogic-test-2 ✅ all 28 tests passed 6 min 34 sec Fixed
idc-jenkins-ci-tidb/sqllogic-test-1 ✅ all 26 tests passed 5 min 54 sec Fixed
idc-jenkins-ci/integration-cdc-test 🟢 all 38 tests passed 19 min Existing passed
idc-jenkins-ci-tidb/integration-common-test 🟢 all 17 tests passed 14 min Existing passed
idc-jenkins-ci-tidb/tics-test 🟢 all 1 tests passed 5 min 24 sec Existing passed
idc-jenkins-ci-tidb/mybatis-test 🟢 all 1 tests passed 3 min 42 sec Existing passed
idc-jenkins-ci-tidb/integration-compatibility-test 🟢 all 1 tests passed 2 min 53 sec Existing passed
idc-jenkins-ci-tidb/plugin-test 🟢 build success, plugin test success 4min Existing passed

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. status/LGT2 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 2.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

phase 2 restore - recovery all tikv data into a consistency state
6 participants