Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Oct 11, 2024. It is now read-only.

do not allow backups with no details snapshot to participate as a base in an incremental backup #1878

Closed
Tracked by #1877
, #1777
...
ashmrtn opened this issue Dec 20, 2022 · 2 comments
Closed
Tracked by #1877
, #1777
...

do not allow backups with no details snapshot to participate as a base in an incremental backup #1878

ashmrtn opened this issue Dec 20, 2022 · 2 comments
Assignees
@ryanfkeepers
Labels
bug Something isn't working releaseblocker

Comments

@ashmrtn
Copy link
Contributor

ashmrtn commented Dec 20, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Allowing backups that only have an item data snapshot allows Corso to get into a bad state where it can only continue successfully making backups if the user manually deletes the backups missing backup details. The reason for this is that half completed backups will continue to be generated (there is no problem backing up the data, only the backup details) and, because they are the most recent, continue to be used as bases for future backups
@ashmrtn ashmrtn mentioned this issue Dec 20, 2022
Closed
2 tasks
@ashmrtn ashmrtn added the bug Something isn't working label Dec 20, 2022
@ashmrtn ashmrtn mentioned this issue Dec 20, 2022
Closed
29 tasks
@ashmrtn ashmrtn changed the title do not allow these backups to participate as a base in an incremental backup do not allow backups with no details snapshott to participate as a base in an incremental backup Dec 20, 2022
@ashmrtn ashmrtn changed the title do not allow backups with no details snapshott to participate as a base in an incremental backup do not allow backups with no details snapshot to participate as a base in an incremental backup Dec 20, 2022
@ashmrtn
Copy link
Contributor Author

ashmrtn commented Dec 20, 2022

this will likely be easier to implement after the following have been completed

@ashmrtn
Copy link
Contributor Author

ashmrtn commented Dec 23, 2022

During a call we discussed having an interim solution that would just fallback to a full backup if one of the base snapshots was missing the details. This would keep Corso from getting into a bad state, though will require a little bit of code rearrangement and will be less efficient when it does need to fallback

@ryanfkeepers ryanfkeepers mentioned this issue Jan 6, 2023
Merged
3 tasks
aviator-app bot pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jan 6, 2023
@ryanfkeepers
full backup if prev snapshots have no details (#2049)
70a8f53 
## Description

In the event that a backup is completed but the details, somehow, isn't persisted, we want the next backup to do a full, instead of an incremental, backup.  If we don't have this protection the following backups could end up in a bad state.  Future changes will add better resilience so that the fallback isn't needed.

## Does this PR need a docs update or release note?

- [x] ⛔ No 

## Type of change

- [x] 🌻 Feature

## Issue(s)

* #1878

## Test Plan

- [x] 💚 E2E
@ryanfkeepers ryanfkeepers mentioned this issue Jan 8, 2023
Closed
3 tasks
@vkamra vkamra closed this as completed Jan 9, 2023
ryanfkeepers added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 17, 2023
@ryanfkeepers
full backup if prev snapshots have no details (#2049)
154572f 
## Description

In the event that a backup is completed but the details, somehow, isn't persisted, we want the next backup to do a full, instead of an incremental, backup.  If we don't have this protection the following backups could end up in a bad state.  Future changes will add better resilience so that the fallback isn't needed.

## Does this PR need a docs update or release note?

- [x] ⛔ No 

## Type of change

- [x] 🌻 Feature

## Issue(s)

* #1878

## Test Plan

- [x] 💚 E2E
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Assignees

@ryanfkeepers ryanfkeepers

Labels
bug Something isn't working releaseblocker
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@vkamra @ashmrtn @ryanfkeepers