Some distributed file systems heretofore use a network of controllers to manage transactions to and from a storage unit. Such controllers may replicate transaction logs amongst themselves. In the event a controller fails, the transaction logs may be used to determine the transactions that were in progress when the controller failed.
As noted above, controllers in a network may replicate transaction logs amongst themselves for fault tolerance purposes. If one controller fails, another controller may substitute for the failed controller. By analyzing the transaction logs, the substituting controller may continue from where the failed controller ended. Some controllers ignore the received transaction logs until the sending controller fails. Such controllers may be known as “passive recipients.” This approach has the advantage of being undisruptive to the system. In this instance, the recipient does not authenticate the received transaction logs upon receipt and simply ignores them; furthermore, the sending controller does not wait for confirmation from the recipient.
However, while passive recipient controllers are undisruptive, problems may occur if the replicated transaction logs are corrupt and the sending controller fails. In this instance, the substituting controller may not be able to determine which storage unit the transaction logs are associated with and the entire system may be automatically stopped. Support engineers may need to stabilize the system by inspecting the logs in each controller's memory and undoing some transactions. Piecing together the transaction logs may be a burdensome, tedious process. The transaction logs may be scattered across different memory addresses; therefore, not only is it difficult to determine which storage unit generated each transaction log, but the disorderly or otherwise random arrangement of the logs makes it difficult to determine the correct chronological sequence of the logs.
In view of the foregoing, examples disclosed herein address these issues by providing a system, computer-readable medium, and method for maintaining transaction logs. In one example, storage unit transaction logs received from controllers are separated into different lists or sequences such that each list or sequence contains transaction logs generated by one storage unit. Thus, rather than being randomly arranged in memory, the logs may be segregated by storage unit. If transaction logs from a failed controller are unreadable, the failed controller may be substituted by another without halting the entire system, since the sender of the logs can be automatically determined despite corruption of the logs. In yet a further example, checksums may be used to authenticate the content and the order of the logs. The aspects, features and advantages of the present disclosure will be appreciated when considered with reference to the following description of examples and accompanying figures. The following description does not limit the application; rather, the scope of the disclosure is defined by the appended claims and equivalents.
Non-transitory computer readable media may comprise any one of many physical media such as, for example, electronic, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, or semiconductor media. More specific examples of suitable non-transitory computer-readable media include, but are not limited to, a portable magnetic computer diskette such as floppy diskettes or hard drives, a read-only memory (“ROM”), an erasable programmable read-only memory, a portable compact disc or other storage devices that may be coupled to computer apparatus 100 directly or indirectly. Alternatively, non-transitory CRM 112 may be a random access memory (“RAM”) device or may be divided into multiple memory segments organized as dual in-line memory modules (“DIMMs”). The non-transitory CRM 112 may also include any combination of one or more of the foregoing and/or other devices as well. While only one processor and one non-transitory CRM are shown in
The instructions residing in non-transitory CRM 112 may comprise any set of instructions to be executed directly (such as machine code) or indirectly (such as scripts) by processor 110. In this regard, the terms “instructions,” “scripts,” and “applications” may be used interchangeably herein. The computer executable instructions may be stored in any computer language or format, such as in object code or modules of source code. Furthermore, it is understood that the instructions may be implemented in the form of hardware, software, or a combination of hardware and software and that the examples herein are merely illustrative.
As noted above, a file system may comprise a network of controllers that manage transactions to and from at least one storage unit and that maintain transaction logs containing details of the transactions. Each controller in the network may be configured similarly to computer apparatus 100 of
Working examples of the system, method, and non-transitory computer-readable medium are shown in
As shown in block 202 of
Referring back to
Referring back to the example of
Controller 302 may replicate copies of list 314 to controller 318 such that, in the event controller 302 fails, controller 318 may substitute for controller 302 using a copy of list 314. Controller 318 may also keep local copies of list 306 and list 314 in its own memory. While
Upon receipt of each transaction log by a controller (e.g., controller 302), a content check sum may be derived for each received transaction log and a pointer checksum may be derived for each pointer or link associating a pair of received transaction logs in each list. As will be discussed further below, these checksums may be used to authenticate the content of each transaction log and an order of the transaction logs in each list or series of transaction logs. In one example, the order of the logs may be defined as the chronological order in which the transaction logs were generated.
Referring now to
Advantageously, the foregoing system, method, and non-transitory computer readable medium may distribute or otherwise segregate the transaction logs into separate lists such that each list comprises transaction logs from one storage unit. In this regard, the system may recover from a failed controller automatically by checking a list head record indicative of the storage unit from which the logs in each list originate. In turn, the techniques disclosed herein may prevent a system from coming to a halt when authentication of a transaction log fails. Instead, the failed remote controller is replaced in a way that is seamless and undisruptive to the system.
Although the disclosure herein has been described with reference to particular examples, it is to be understood that these examples are merely illustrative of the principles of the disclosure. It is therefore to be understood that numerous modifications may be made to the examples and that other arrangements may be devised without departing from the spirit and scope of the disclosure as defined by the appended claims. Furthermore, while particular processes are shown in a specific order in the appended drawings, such processes are not limited to any particular order unless such order is expressly set forth herein; rather, processes may be performed in a different order or concurrently and steps may be added or omitted.
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
PCT/US2013/057185 | 8/29/2013 | WO | 00 |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2015/030758 | 3/5/2015 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5287501 | Lomet | Feb 1994 | A |
6055604 | Voigt et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
7900085 | Little | Mar 2011 | B2 |
8224877 | Barrall et al. | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8266101 | Shuai | Sep 2012 | B1 |
20020188733 | Collins et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20060206544 | Oks et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20080189498 | Brown | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20090100113 | Burghard et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090172211 | Perry et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20100169284 | Walter et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20120144152 | Jeddeloh | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120311376 | Taranov et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1454349 | Nov 2003 | CN |
101853186 | Oct 2010 | CN |
103270500 | Aug 2013 | CN |
Entry |
---|
ISR/WO, PCT/US2013/057185, HP reference 83276216, May 27, 2014, 9 pps. |
Michael Lee, “A Guide to Exchange Disaster Recovery Planning,” (Web Page), 2006, pp. 1-11, Microsoft Corporation and CMP Media, LLC, Available at: <technet.microsoft.com/enus/magazine/2006.08.exchangerecovery.aspx>. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20160203043 A1 | Jul 2016 | US |