Incrementals blog(s), part 1 and 2 (#3053)
<!-- PR description--> These will both go out on the 10th, they have 2 different dates to make sure the blog orders them correctly --- #### Does this PR need a docs update or release note? - [ ] ✅ Yes, it's included - [ ] 🕐 Yes, but in a later PR - [x] ⛔ No #### Type of change <!--- Please check the type of change your PR introduces: ---> - [ ] 🌻 Feature - [ ] 🐛 Bugfix - [x] 🗺️ Documentation - [ ] 🤖 Supportability/Tests - [ ] 💻 CI/Deployment - [ ] 🧹 Tech Debt/Cleanup #### Issue(s) <!-- Can reference multiple issues. Use one of the following "magic words" - "closes, fixes" to auto-close the Github issue. --> * #<issue> #### Test Plan <!-- How will this be tested prior to merging.--> - [ ] 💪 Manual - [ ] ⚡ Unit test - [ ] 💚 E2E --------- Co-authored-by: Niraj Tolia <ntolia@users.noreply.github.com>
This commit is contained in:
Nočnica Mellifera
GitHub
parent
3c26b09d71
commit
ecb1fdc40a
158
website/blog/2023-05-12-incrementals-pt1.md
Normal file
158
website/blog/2023-05-12-incrementals-pt1.md
Normal file
@ -0,0 +1,158 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
slug: incremental-backups-pt1
|
||||
title: "Speeding up Microsoft 365 backups with delta tokens"
|
||||
description: "Recent additions to Corso have reduced the duration of backups after the
|
||||
first backup by taking advantage of Microsoft’s delta query API. Doing so allows
|
||||
Corso to retrieve only the changes to the user’s data since the last backup
|
||||
instead of having to retrieve all items with the Graph API. However,
|
||||
implementing backups in this manner required us to play a few tricks with the
|
||||
Corso implementation, so we thought we’d share them here."
|
||||
authors: amartinez
|
||||
tags: [corso, microsoft 365, backups]
|
||||
date: 2023-05-12
|
||||
image: ./images/incremental-encoder.jpg
|
||||
---
|
||||
<!-- vale Vale.Spelling = NO -->
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- vale Vale.Spelling = YES -->
|
||||
|
||||
Full Microsoft 365 backups can take a long time, especially since Microsoft
|
||||
throttles the number of requests an application can make in a given window of
|
||||
time. Recent additions to Corso have reduced the duration of backups after the
|
||||
first backup by taking advantage of Microsoft’s delta query API. Doing so allows
|
||||
Corso to retrieve only the changes to the user’s data since the last backup
|
||||
instead of having to retrieve all items with the Graph API. However,
|
||||
implementing backups in this manner required us to play a few tricks with the
|
||||
Corso implementation, so we thought we’d share them here.
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- truncate -->
|
||||
|
||||
## Background
|
||||
|
||||
Before we dive into the details of how incremental backups work, it’s useful to
|
||||
have some knowledge of how delta queries work in the Microsoft Graph API and how
|
||||
data is laid out in Corso backups.
|
||||
|
||||
### Microsoft delta queries
|
||||
|
||||
Microsoft provides a delta query API that allows developers to get only the
|
||||
changes to the endpoint since the last query was made. The API represents the
|
||||
idea of the “last query” with an opaque token that's returned when the set of
|
||||
items is done being listed. For example, if a developer wants to get a delta
|
||||
token for a specific email folder, the developer would first list all the items
|
||||
in the folder using the delta endpoint. On the final page of item results from
|
||||
the endpoint, the Graph API would return a token that could be used to retrieve
|
||||
future updates.
|
||||
|
||||
All returned tokens represent a point in time and are independent from each
|
||||
other. This means that getting token a1 at time t1, making some changes, and
|
||||
then getting another token a2 at time t2 would give distinct tokens. Requesting
|
||||
the changes from token a1 would always give the changes made after time t1
|
||||
including those after time t2. Requesting changes from token a2 would give only
|
||||
the changes made after time t2. Tokens eventually expire though, so waiting a
|
||||
long time between backups (for example, a few days) may cause all items to be
|
||||
enumerated again. See Nica's
|
||||
[previous blog post on how backup frequency](https://corsobackup.io/blog/how-often-should-you-run-microsoft-365-backups)
|
||||
can affect performance.
|
||||
|
||||
## Corso full backups, incremental backups, and backup layout
|
||||
|
||||
Before we get into the nuts and bolts of how Corso uses the Microsoft delta
|
||||
query API, it’s important to first define what’s in a backup and the terminology
|
||||
we’ll be using throughout this post.
|
||||
|
||||
### Kopia
|
||||
|
||||
Corso makes extensive use of [Kopia](https://github.com/kopia/kopia) to
|
||||
implement our Microsoft 365 backup functionality. Kopia is a fast and secure
|
||||
open-source backup/restore tool that allows you to create encrypted snapshots of
|
||||
your data and save the snapshots to remote or cloud storage of your choice.
|
||||
|
||||
### Backup layout
|
||||
|
||||
Internally, a single Corso backup consists of three main parts: a kopia manifest
|
||||
that Corso uses as the root object of the backup (BackupModel), a kopia index
|
||||
for Corso, and a kopia data backup. The BackupModel contains summary information
|
||||
about the status of the backup (did it have errors, how many items did it
|
||||
backup, etc) and pointers to the two snapshots that contain information.
|
||||
|
||||
The kopia index contains the data output during a
|
||||
`corso backup details` command and is used to filter the set of restored items
|
||||
during restore commands. The index contains one entry for every backed up
|
||||
Microsoft 365 item in the backup.
|
||||
|
||||
The data backup contains the raw bytes that Corso backed up from Microsoft 365.
|
||||
Internally, Corso uses a file hierarchy in kopia that closely mirrors the layout
|
||||
of the data in Microsoft 365. For example, if the user has a file in the OneDrive folder
|
||||
`work/important` then Corso creates a kopia path
|
||||
`<tenant ID>/onedrive/<user ID>/files/<drive ID>/root/work/important` for that
|
||||
file.
|
||||
|
||||
Corso also stores a few extra bits of metadata in the data snapshot to help with
|
||||
incremental backups. Most importantly, it stores the Graph API’s delta tokens
|
||||
retrieved during the backup process as well as a mapping relating the current
|
||||
Microsoft 365 folder IDs to their paths. This information is stored with
|
||||
different path prefixes (ex. uses `onedriveMetadata` instead of `onedrive`) to
|
||||
make it straightforward to separate out from backed up item data.
|
||||
|
||||
### Terminology
|
||||
|
||||
*Full backups* are backups where all of the data being backed up is fetched from
|
||||
Microsoft 365 with the Graph API. These backups may take a long time to complete (we’ve
|
||||
seen backups of accounts with extremely large amounts of data run for 20+ hours) due to throttling imposed by Microsoft 365.
|
||||
For the purposes of this blog, *incremental backups* are backups where Corso
|
||||
fetches only a subset of items from Microsoft 365. Ideally Corso would fetch only the
|
||||
items that change, though there may be reasons it needs to fetch more data.
|
||||
|
||||
Whether Corso does a full backup or an incremental backup, the resulting Corso
|
||||
backup has a listing of all items stored in Microsoft 365 (what we refer to as *indexing
|
||||
information*). This means there’s no “chaining” between backups and restoring an
|
||||
item from a backup requires only accessing information contained in or
|
||||
referenced directly by the backup passed in to the restore command. This makes
|
||||
backups independent from each other once they’ve been created, so we’ll refer to
|
||||
them as *independent backups* for the rest of this post.
|
||||
|
||||
Both independent backups and chained backups have the same information. Having
|
||||
independent backups generally creates more complexity when making a new backup
|
||||
while chained backups generally have more complexity during restore and backup
|
||||
deletion. Independent backups have more complexity when creating the backup as
|
||||
indexing information and item data references for deduplicated data may need to
|
||||
be sourced from previous backups. Chained backups have more complex restore as
|
||||
multiple backups may need to be searched for the item being restored. They also
|
||||
have more complex backup deletion as an item’s data can only be deleted if no
|
||||
backups in any chain refer to it. The figure below gives a high-level overview
|
||||
of the differences between independent backups and chained backups.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
*both images below show how data would be stored if the user backed up two files on their first backup and then made a*
|
||||
*new file and updated file1 before taking a second backup*
|
||||
|
||||
*both images below show how data would be stored if the user backed up two files on their first backup and then made a*
|
||||
*new file and updated file1 before taking a second backup*
|
||||
|
||||
Although having a full listing of all items present at the time of the backup in
|
||||
each backups sounds wasteful, Corso takes advantage of the data deduplication
|
||||
provided by kopia to only store one copy of the underlying bulk data in the data
|
||||
snapshot for backed up items. What this really means is each Corso backup has a
|
||||
complete set of *indexing information*. This gives Corso the best of both
|
||||
worlds; allowing completed backups to have independent indexing information and
|
||||
life cycles from each other while still minimizing the amount of item data
|
||||
stored.
|
||||
|
||||
Understanding how Microsoft provides information on item updates is a key part
|
||||
of Corso's ability to provide fast, high-performance backups that still
|
||||
accurately reflect all updates. If you have feedback, questions, or want more information, please join us on the [Corso Discord](https://discord.gg/63DTTSnuhT).
|
||||
|
||||
> 💡 In
|
||||
> [part 2 of our series](2023-05-13-incrementals-pt2.md),
|
||||
> we’ll cover Incremental backups in action, and how Corso manages state and
|
||||
> merges updates to the hierarchy.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Try Corso Today
|
||||
|
||||
Corso implements compression, deduplication *and* incremental backups to give
|
||||
you the best backup performance. Check
|
||||
[our quickstart guide](http://localhost:3000/docs/quickstart/) to see how to get started.
|
||||
547
website/blog/2023-05-13-incrementals-pt2.md
Normal file
547
website/blog/2023-05-13-incrementals-pt2.md
Normal file
@ -0,0 +1,547 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
slug: incremental-backups-pt2
|
||||
title: "Incremental Microsoft 365 backups in action"
|
||||
description: "In part 1 we discussed how there’s more than one way to run backups, and how full and incremental backups differ. With all the background information out of the way, it’s time to see how incremental backups actually come together in Corso. To do this, we’ll discuss things in the context of a running example."
|
||||
authors: amartinez
|
||||
tags: [corso, microsoft 365, backups]
|
||||
date: 2023-05-13
|
||||
image: ./images/incremental-scale.png
|
||||
---
|
||||
<!-- vale Vale.Spelling = NO -->
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- vale Vale.Spelling = YES -->
|
||||
|
||||
In [Part 1](2023-05-12-incrementals-pt1.md) we discussed how there’s more than
|
||||
one way to run backups, and how full and incremental backups differ.
|
||||
|
||||
With all the background information out of the way, it’s time to see how
|
||||
incremental backups are implemented in Corso. To do this, we’ll discuss
|
||||
things in the context of a running example.
|
||||
<!-- truncate -->
|
||||
## Part 1: Starting state
|
||||
|
||||
Let’s say that Corso has previously run a backup for a user’s OneDrive. At the
|
||||
time of the backup, the drive had a layout like the below when listing all items
|
||||
in the root folder:
|
||||
|
||||
```JSON
|
||||
- folder1 (directory, ID: 1)
|
||||
- super secret file1.txt (file, ID: 2)
|
||||
- temp.log (file, ID: 3)
|
||||
- folder2 (directory, ID: 4)
|
||||
- secret file.docx (file, ID: 5)
|
||||
- folder3 (directory, ID: 6)
|
||||
- static file.docx (file, ID: 7)
|
||||
- folder4 (directory, ID: 8)
|
||||
- plain file.txt (file, ID: 9)
|
||||
- folder5 (directory, ID: 10)
|
||||
- update.log (file, ID: 11)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
The corresponding Corso backup would have the following items in the kopia item
|
||||
data snapshot (some prefix folders elided for brevity and file/folder names use
|
||||
directly for clarity):
|
||||
|
||||
```JSON
|
||||
- onedrive
|
||||
- root
|
||||
- folder1
|
||||
- super secret file1.txt
|
||||
- temp.log
|
||||
- folder2
|
||||
- secret file.docx
|
||||
- folder3
|
||||
- static file.docx
|
||||
- folder4
|
||||
- plain file.txt
|
||||
- folder5
|
||||
- update.log
|
||||
- onedriveMetadata
|
||||
- folderMap.json (provides mapping of folder IDs to paths)
|
||||
- delta.json (provides delta tokens for endpoints)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Since this post is all about fetching only the changes since the last backup,
|
||||
let’s also assume that between the time of the last backup and now the user has
|
||||
done the equivalent to the following commands in their OneDrive:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
rm -rf root/folder2 (directory subtree deletion)
|
||||
mkdir root/folder2 (directory creation)
|
||||
touch root/folder2/new secret file.txt (file creation)
|
||||
echo "hello world" >> root/folder1/super secret file1.txt (file update)
|
||||
rm root/folder1/tmp.log (file deletion)
|
||||
mv root/folder4 root/folder1 (make directory subdirectory of another)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
After the above commands are run, the layout in OneDrive looks like (again, listing all items in the root folder)
|
||||
|
||||
```JSON
|
||||
- folder1 (directory, ID: 1)
|
||||
- super secret file1.txt (file, ID: 2)
|
||||
- folder4 (directory, ID: 8)
|
||||
- plain file.txt (file, ID: 9)
|
||||
- folder5 (directory, ID: 10)
|
||||
- test.log (file, ID: 11)
|
||||
- folder2 (directory, ID: 12)
|
||||
- new secret file.docx (file, ID: 13)
|
||||
- folder3 (directory, ID: 6)
|
||||
- static file.docx (file, ID: 7)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Part 2: Finding the last backup
|
||||
|
||||
Now, the user runs `corso backup create onedrive` . The first thing Corso will
|
||||
do is find the most recently completed backup for OneDrive (call it the *base
|
||||
backup* for this operation) for the user being backed up and load the
|
||||
`folderMap.json` and `delta.json` files from it. `folderMap.json` contains the
|
||||
mapping of folder IDs to paths and will help Corso determine how the folder
|
||||
hierarchy evolved between the backups. `delta.json` contains all delta token(s)
|
||||
that the previous backup generated. These will be used to fetch only the changes
|
||||
by sending them to Microsoft’s delta endpoints.
|
||||
|
||||
OneDrive has a single delta endpoint per drive, so the `delta.json` file
|
||||
contains only a single opaque delta token. The data in `folderMap.json` contains
|
||||
all folders that were in the previous backup, so it would look like
|
||||
|
||||
```JSON
|
||||
- ID1: root/folder1
|
||||
- ID4: root/folder2
|
||||
- ID6: root/folder3
|
||||
- ID8: root/folder4
|
||||
- ID10: root/folder4/folder5
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Part 3: Getting and organizing changes
|
||||
|
||||
With the delta token in hand, Corso can request Microsoft send it changes since
|
||||
the last backup. Sending the token to the Microsoft endpoint would yield results
|
||||
like the following:
|
||||
|
||||
```JSON
|
||||
{
|
||||
{
|
||||
id: 3,
|
||||
deleted: true,
|
||||
parentPath: "/root",
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
id: 4,
|
||||
deleted: true,
|
||||
type: folder,
|
||||
parentPath: "/root",
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
id: 5,
|
||||
deleted: true,
|
||||
type: file,
|
||||
parentPath: "/root",
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
id: 1,
|
||||
name: "folder1",
|
||||
type: folder,
|
||||
parentPath: "/root",
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
id: 2,
|
||||
name: "super secret file1.txt",
|
||||
type: file,
|
||||
parentPath: "/root/folder1",
|
||||
parentID: 1
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
id: 8,
|
||||
name: "folder4",
|
||||
type: folder,
|
||||
parentPath: "/root/folder1",
|
||||
parentID: 1
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
id: 12,
|
||||
name: "folder2",
|
||||
type: folder,
|
||||
parentPath: "/root",
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
id: 13,
|
||||
name: "new secret file.txt",
|
||||
type: file,
|
||||
parentPath: "/root/folder2",
|
||||
parentID: 12,
|
||||
},
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Some high-level things to note about the returned results are:
|
||||
|
||||
- deleted OneDrive items don’t show the path they used to reside at but do show if something was a folder or a file
|
||||
- a new version of “folder2” was created. It has the same name and `parentPath` as the previous version but a different ID
|
||||
- both folders and files are returned in the same request
|
||||
- Graph API always returns all returns ancestor folders for an item before the
|
||||
item itself. Folders are returned in the order of the hierarchy (
|
||||
`[root, folder1, ...]`)
|
||||
- items in a deleted folder are also returned as deleted
|
||||
- `folder3` and its items isn’t returned because nothing in that subtree was
|
||||
changed
|
||||
- moving a folder subtree only returns a result for the root of the subtree
|
||||
unless other items in the subtree were individually updated (e.x. no result
|
||||
was returned for `folder5` even though it was moved)
|
||||
|
||||
For every returned item, Corso checks if it’s a folder or a file and reacts accordingly.
|
||||
|
||||
### Handling folders
|
||||
|
||||
Folders have an in-memory representation of a Collection during a backup. This
|
||||
helps Corso group items together and allows Corso to express hierarchy changes
|
||||
the folder may have participated in.
|
||||
|
||||
Every Collection has a current and previous path, representing where the folder
|
||||
is in the hierarchy now and where the folder was in the previous backup. The
|
||||
current path is sourced from the returned results; it can be generated by
|
||||
appending the name of an item to the `parentPath` of the item. Folders that have
|
||||
been deleted have their current path set to an empty value.
|
||||
|
||||
The previous path is found by looking up the folder’s ID in the `folderMap.json`
|
||||
data from the previous backup. Since that map is indexed by ID, it can still
|
||||
find folders that have been deleted or folders that have been renamed. Folders
|
||||
that weren't in the previous backup (created between when the last backup
|
||||
completed and this backup started) have their previous path set to an empty
|
||||
value.
|
||||
|
||||
Together, the values of the current and previous paths allow Corso to represent
|
||||
a set of changes to the hierarchy in an order-independent fashion. That means
|
||||
the Collections always represent the same set of changes no matter what order
|
||||
other components of Corso see the Collections in. The “state” of a Collection
|
||||
can always be determined by comparing the values of the two paths. The table
|
||||
below shows the different possible states.
|
||||
|
||||
| Previous Path | Current Path | State |
|
||||
| --- | --- | --- |
|
||||
| any value | empty | deleted folder |
|
||||
| empty | any value | new folder |
|
||||
| different from current | different from previous | folder moved |
|
||||
| same as current | same as previous | no change |
|
||||
|
||||
To see where this representation and order-independence really comes in handy,
|
||||
consider the case of `folder2`. Between the backups the original `folder2` and
|
||||
all it’s items was deleted and a new folder with the same path was created with
|
||||
a new item. From the user’s perspective and if potential differences in
|
||||
permissions are ignored, there’s not really a difference between the old and new
|
||||
`folder2`s. The items they have may be different, but the user generally doesn’t
|
||||
inspect the Microsoft 365 IDs of folders, so the fact that they reside at the same
|
||||
location and have the same name makes them the “same” in some sense.
|
||||
|
||||
However, Corso shouldn’t treat the old and new folders as the same as it could
|
||||
lead to propagating old information instead of new information (e.x. consider
|
||||
folder permissions, which aren’t discussed here but which users will eventually
|
||||
be able to backup). To distinguish between the two, Corso will create two
|
||||
Collections with different states. Let’s say the first Collection created
|
||||
represents the deleted folder. It will have an empty current path and a previous
|
||||
path equal to `/root/folder2`. The second Collection will have the opposite: a
|
||||
current path of `/root/folder2` and an empty previous path. By having two
|
||||
Collections, Corso can distinguish between the two versions of `folder2` and
|
||||
take the appropriate action for each.
|
||||
|
||||
### Handling files
|
||||
|
||||
Every file in the results is added to the Collection representing the folder
|
||||
containing the item. Which Collection to add the item to can be discovered with
|
||||
the `parentID` field that's set on every item in the result (root’s ID not show
|
||||
in the example). Fetching the actual item data is done later when Corso actually
|
||||
uploads with to kopia.
|
||||
|
||||
Since deleted and moved files don’t denote where they used to reside, every item
|
||||
is also added to a list of item names to “exclude” from the previous backup
|
||||
later on. Tracking this list ensures Corso doesn’t duplicate items or create
|
||||
*zombie items:* items that stick around in the backup even after the user
|
||||
deletes them in Microsoft 365. If the old location of the item is known, then Corso can
|
||||
just add an entry in the corresponding Collection saying the item was deleted
|
||||
(this is how Exchange works as it has a delta endpoint per folder).
|
||||
|
||||
### Putting it all together
|
||||
|
||||
At the end of this part, Corso has processed all delta results and created a set
|
||||
of Collections with items. In the running example we’ve been discussion, Corso
|
||||
will create the following Collections:
|
||||
|
||||
```JSON
|
||||
collections: [
|
||||
{
|
||||
currentPath: "",
|
||||
previousPath: "/root/folder2",
|
||||
itemIDs: [],
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
currentPath: "/root/folder1",
|
||||
previousPath: "root/folder1",
|
||||
itemIDs: [super secret file1.txt (ID: 2)],
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
currentPath: "/root/folder2",
|
||||
previousPath: "",
|
||||
itemIDs: [new secret file.txt (ID: 13)],
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
currentPath: "/root/folder1/folder4",
|
||||
previousPath: "/root/folder4",
|
||||
itemIDs: [],
|
||||
},
|
||||
]
|
||||
|
||||
excludeItemIDs: [2, 3, 5, 13]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Part 4: Merging hierarchies in kopia
|
||||
|
||||
Graph API can give Corso the changes since the last backup, but there’s still a
|
||||
problem: kopia requires that all items that should appear in a snapshot be given
|
||||
to kopia at the time the snapshot is created. In essence, kopia won't
|
||||
automatically merge data from previous snapshots into the current snapshot. This
|
||||
is problematic because if Corso passed only the set of changed items the Graph
|
||||
API returned it would create a snapshot representing only those changes and a
|
||||
lookup in the previous backup would be required to return information about
|
||||
unchanged items. That would require Corso to implement chained backups instead
|
||||
of independent backups.
|
||||
|
||||
Corso works around this by *merging* the set of updated Collections with the
|
||||
folder hierarchy in the base backup. Merging hierarchies is concerned with
|
||||
getting Collections and folders in the correct locations, and assumes that items
|
||||
will land in the right place as long as the containing Collection or folder
|
||||
does.
|
||||
|
||||
Merging hierarchies is done in two steps: first Corso builds an in-memory tree
|
||||
of the non-deleted Collections created from Graph API results and then Corso
|
||||
walks the base backup and adds folders from there to the in-memory tree.
|
||||
|
||||
### Collections
|
||||
|
||||
The first step is mostly straightforward, though Corso does keep some addition
|
||||
metadata to help with deletions, moves, and renames of folders in the backup.
|
||||
|
||||
The in-memory tree Corso creates has a node for every folder in the current path
|
||||
for each Collection even if there’s no Collection for that folder. Creating a
|
||||
consistent in-memory layout like this makes it easier to inform kopia of the
|
||||
complete hierarchy when it comes to actually uploading data. Tree nodes that do
|
||||
correspond to a Collection contain a reference to the Collection. For example,
|
||||
the tree node for `root` won’t have a Collection reference because no Collection
|
||||
was made for it. The tree node for `root/folder1` will have a Collection
|
||||
reference though as earlier parts made a Collection for it. At the end of the
|
||||
first step of hierarchy merging, Corso will have the following information
|
||||
in-memory.
|
||||
|
||||
```JSON
|
||||
tree representation:
|
||||
- root (no Collection)
|
||||
- folder1 (Collection)
|
||||
- folder4 (Collection)
|
||||
- folder2 (Collection)
|
||||
|
||||
extra metadata about changed paths, maps from old path
|
||||
to new where "" means deleted:
|
||||
{
|
||||
"/root/folder2": "",
|
||||
"/root/folder4": "/root/folder1/folder4",
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Base backup entries
|
||||
|
||||
The next step fills in the “unchanged” information by adding references to base
|
||||
backup directories to the in-memory tree (I say “unchanged” because it does
|
||||
include things like unmodified files that got moved when the file’s parent
|
||||
folder moved). Recall that the base backup had the following layout in kopia:
|
||||
|
||||
```JSON
|
||||
- onedrive
|
||||
- root
|
||||
- folder1
|
||||
- super secret file1.txt
|
||||
- temp.log
|
||||
- folder2
|
||||
- secret file.docx
|
||||
- folder3
|
||||
- static file.docx
|
||||
- folder4
|
||||
- plain file.txt
|
||||
- folder5
|
||||
- update.log
|
||||
- onedriveMetadata
|
||||
- folderMap.json (provides mapping of folder IDs to paths)
|
||||
- delta.json (provides delta tokens for endpoints)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
For the merging step, Corso is interested only in the subtree rooted at
|
||||
`onedrive/root` as the metadata will be replaced completely with new metadata.
|
||||
Corso traverses the base backup in a depth-first manner and, for every folder it
|
||||
will determine the answer to the following questions:
|
||||
|
||||
1. has the folder been explicitly renamed, moved, or deleted?
|
||||
2. is the folder a descendant of a deleted folder?
|
||||
3. is the folder a descendant of a folder that was renamed or moved?
|
||||
|
||||
These questions can be answered by getting the path of the folder in the base
|
||||
backup, dynamically generating the expected path of the folder in the current
|
||||
backup based on any changes that may have happened to ancestors of the folder,
|
||||
and checking the metadata Corso set aside in the previous step.
|
||||
|
||||
The first check handles folder renames, moves, and deletions by seeing if
|
||||
there’s a metadata map entry for the folder’s base backup path. The second and
|
||||
third checks use dynamically generated expected paths to implement operations
|
||||
that act on subtrees of the hierarchy instead of individual folders. Moving
|
||||
`folder4` to be a subfolder of `folder1` (and `folder5` to be a subsubfolder of
|
||||
`folder1` ) is an example where these subtree operations are needed.
|
||||
|
||||
The order Corso processes these checks is important. For example, reversing the
|
||||
first and second check will result in mistakenly deleting folders that were
|
||||
moved prior to deleting the parent of the folder (e.x.
|
||||
`mv /root/folder4/folder5; rm -rf /root/folder4`) because Corso will see the
|
||||
folder is a descendent of something that was deleted and think it should be
|
||||
deleted as well.
|
||||
|
||||
When augmenting the in-memory tree, folders that are marked as deleted don't
|
||||
have their reference added to a tree node. Folders that were moved or renamed
|
||||
have their reference added to the tree node where the folder resides in the
|
||||
currently running backup.
|
||||
|
||||
To give a concrete example of how this would work, let’s look at how Corso would
|
||||
process `folder4` and `folder5` from the base backup. When Corso reaches
|
||||
`folder4` in the base backup, it generates the base backup path `/root/folder4`
|
||||
, an expected path of `/root/folder4` (no ancestors of `folder4` changed), and
|
||||
checks to see if the base backup path exists in the metadata map. Corso finds
|
||||
the updated path `/root/folder1/folder4` in the metadata map which represents
|
||||
the new path `folder4` should reside at. Since the metadata map shows `folder4`
|
||||
still exists in the currently running backup, a reference to the base backup’s
|
||||
`folder4` is added to the in-memory tree node for that folder.
|
||||
|
||||
Next, Corso processes the subfolders of `folder4`, in this case `folder5`. At
|
||||
this point `folder5` has a base backup path of `/root/folder4/folder5` and an
|
||||
expected path of `/root/folder1/folder4/folder5` . As no entry for
|
||||
`/root/folder4/folder5` is found in the metadata map, the expected path is used
|
||||
and a new in-memory tree node for `folder5` is created with a reference to the
|
||||
base backup’s `folder5`.
|
||||
|
||||
By the end of merging, the in-memory tree that Corso’s building has the layout
|
||||
shown below. The additional in-memory metadata map that was created in the first
|
||||
step of merging can be discarded as it’s no longer needed.
|
||||
|
||||
```JSON
|
||||
tree representation:
|
||||
- root (no Collection, base backup directory)
|
||||
- folder1 (Collection, base backup directory)
|
||||
- folder4 (Collection, base backup directory)
|
||||
- folder5 (base backup directory)
|
||||
- folder2 (Collection)
|
||||
- folder3 (base backup directory)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Part 5: Merging items in folders and uploading data
|
||||
|
||||
Once the in-memory tree of the folder hierarchy is created Corso can finally
|
||||
begin uploading items to S3 with kopia. This is done by starting a kopia
|
||||
snapshot with the in-memory tree as the “file system” hierarchy to backup. When
|
||||
each folder in the hierarchy is read by kopia, Corso first passes kopia the set
|
||||
of items in the Collection for the folder, if a Collection is present. Items
|
||||
sourced from a Collection also have their IDs tracked by Corso so it can exclude
|
||||
those items when reading from the base backup’s folder if one a reference is
|
||||
present.
|
||||
|
||||
Once all the items in the Collection have been given to kopia, Corso begins
|
||||
giving kopia entries from the base backup folder if there’s one associated with
|
||||
the in-memory tree node. While doing this, Corso checks each item in the base
|
||||
backup folder to see if it matches either the exclude list generated in part 3
|
||||
or an item that was streamed from the Collection. Filtering out these items has
|
||||
the effect of “deleting” that copy of them from the current backup. If these
|
||||
items weren’t filtered out then the Corso backup would either have duplicate
|
||||
items (if the item was updated or moved between directories) or have *zombie
|
||||
items* (if the item was deleted). Items from the base backup that are actually
|
||||
included in the current backup are tracked so Corso can also retrieve their
|
||||
indexing information in the next part.
|
||||
|
||||
Data for items is pulled from Microsoft 365 using the Graph API when kopia actually needs
|
||||
to upload the data to S3. By lazily fetching data, Corso avoids making Graph API
|
||||
requests if kopia already has a copy of that item’s data. It also reduces the
|
||||
memory footprint of Corso because only a few items’ data needs to be in memory
|
||||
at any given point in time.
|
||||
|
||||
Going back to our running example, the folder merge operation for `folder1` would proceed as follows:
|
||||
|
||||
```JSON
|
||||
// starting state
|
||||
global exclude items: [
|
||||
super secret file1.txt (ID: 2),
|
||||
tmp.log (ID: 3),
|
||||
secret file.docx (ID: 5),
|
||||
new secret file.docx (ID 13),
|
||||
]
|
||||
local exclude items: []
|
||||
|
||||
// items from Collection
|
||||
super secret file1.txt (ID: 2) // uploaded, add to local exclude items
|
||||
|
||||
// new state
|
||||
global exclude list: [
|
||||
super secret file1.txt (ID: 2),
|
||||
tmp.log (ID: 3),
|
||||
secret file.docx (ID: 5),
|
||||
new secret file.docx (ID 13),
|
||||
]
|
||||
local exclude items: [super secret file1.txt (ID: 2)]
|
||||
|
||||
// items from base backup
|
||||
super secret file1.txt (ID: 2) // skipped because it's in local exclude items
|
||||
temp.log (ID: 3) // skipped because it's in the global exclude items
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
By the end of this part, Corso has also collected references for all items
|
||||
sourced from the base backup. The references that Corso tracks helps it map from
|
||||
the old location of the item to the new one as shown below.
|
||||
|
||||
```JSON
|
||||
items from base backup: [
|
||||
/root/folder3/static file.docx => /root/folder3/static file.docx
|
||||
/root/folder4/plain file.txt => /root/folder1/folder4/plain file.txt
|
||||
/root/folder4/folder5/update.log => /root/folder1/folder4/folder5/update.log
|
||||
]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Part 6: Merging indexing information and persisting the Backup model
|
||||
|
||||
The final thing Corso needs to do is merge the set of updated indexing
|
||||
information with indexing information from the base backup. Merging the two
|
||||
allows Corso to filter backup details and restore inputs down to just the
|
||||
selected items without having to traverse multiple backups to find all the
|
||||
information.
|
||||
|
||||
To merge indexing information, Corso first loads the indexing information from
|
||||
the base backup. Then, it compares the entries in the base backup’s index with
|
||||
the set of references collected in the previous part. Entries that match are
|
||||
updated if needed (the item’s location in OneDrive may have changed) and
|
||||
added to the new set of indexing information for the current backup.
|
||||
|
||||
Once the indexing information has been merged all data for the backup is
|
||||
complete except the BackupModel that acts as the root reference for the backup.
|
||||
The backup model summarizes what happened in the backup and contains references
|
||||
to the index information and the item data snapshot so they can be found later.
|
||||
The model itself is also stored in kopia so it’s data is encrypted as well. Once
|
||||
the BackupModel is added to kopia the Corso backup is considered complete and
|
||||
can be used for future restores.
|
||||
|
||||
## The Journey of Incremental Backups
|
||||
|
||||
Incremental backups are a key component of a high-performance backup strategy.
|
||||
In this piece (and
|
||||
[in part 1](2023-05-12-incrementals-pt1.md)), we've
|
||||
covered how we tackled the challenge using the Microsoft Graph API. If you have
|
||||
feedback, questions, or want more information, please join us on the
|
||||
[Corso Discord](https://discord.gg/63DTTSnuhT).
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Try Corso Today
|
||||
|
||||
Corso implements compression, deduplication *and* incremental backups to give
|
||||
you the best backup performance. Check
|
||||
[our quickstart guide](../../docs/quickstart/) to see how
|
||||
quickly you can get started.
|
||||
@ -21,3 +21,9 @@ gmatev:
|
||||
title: Head of Product
|
||||
url: https://github.com/gmatev
|
||||
image_url: https://github.com/gmatev.png
|
||||
|
||||
amartinez:
|
||||
name: Ashlie Martinez
|
||||
title: Member of Technical Staff
|
||||
url: https://github.com/ashmrtn
|
||||
image_url: ./images/ashlie.png
|
||||
|
||||
BIN
website/blog/images/ashlie.png
Normal file
BIN
website/blog/images/ashlie.png
Normal file
Binary file not shown.
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 617 KiB |
BIN
website/blog/images/chained_backups.png
Normal file
BIN
website/blog/images/chained_backups.png
Normal file
Binary file not shown.
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 36 KiB |
BIN
website/blog/images/incremental-encoder.jpg
Normal file
BIN
website/blog/images/incremental-encoder.jpg
Normal file
Binary file not shown.
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 286 KiB |
BIN
website/blog/images/incremental-scale.png
Normal file
BIN
website/blog/images/incremental-scale.png
Normal file
Binary file not shown.
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 122 KiB |
BIN
website/blog/images/independent_backups.png
Normal file
BIN
website/blog/images/independent_backups.png
Normal file
Binary file not shown.
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 34 KiB |
@ -55,4 +55,6 @@ Malbrough
|
||||
lockdowns
|
||||
exfiltrate
|
||||
deduplicating
|
||||
anonymized
|
||||
subtree
|
||||
subtrees
|
||||
anonymized
|
||||
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user