233 lines
9.5 KiB
Markdown
233 lines
9.5 KiB
Markdown
This is a fairly detailed design proposal for using git-annex to build
|
|
<http://archiveteam.org/index.php?title=INTERNETARCHIVE.BAK>
|
|
|
|
## sharding to scale
|
|
|
|
The IA contains some 24 million Items.
|
|
|
|
git repositories do not scale well past the 1-10 million file
|
|
range, and very badly above that. Storing individual IA Items
|
|
would strain git's scalability badly.
|
|
|
|
Solution: Create multiple git repositories, and split the Items amoung
|
|
them.
|
|
|
|
* Needs a map from an Item to its repository. (Could be stored in a
|
|
database, or whatever.)
|
|
|
|
* If each git repository holds 10 thousand items, that's 2400 repositories,
|
|
which is not an unmanagable number. (For comparison, git.debian.org
|
|
has 18500 repositories.) (100 thousand items would be the higher end, for
|
|
240 repositories.)
|
|
|
|
* The IA is ~20 Petabytes large. Each shard would thus be around 8
|
|
Terabytes. (Item sizes will vary a lot, so there's the
|
|
potential to get a shard that's unusually small or large. This could be
|
|
dealt with when assigning Items to the shards, to balance sizes out.)
|
|
|
|
* The Items in each shard are then distributed out to the clients who
|
|
have been assigned that shard. Clients will store varying amounts of
|
|
data, but probably under 1 Terabyte per client. And we want redundancy
|
|
(LOCKSS) -- say at least 3 copies. So, estimate around 25-100 clients need
|
|
to be assigned to each shard to get it backed up.
|
|
|
|
* Add new shards as the IA continues to grow.
|
|
|
|
## the IA git repository
|
|
|
|
We're building a pyramid of git-annex repositories, and at the tip
|
|
of this is a single git repository, which represents the entire Internet
|
|
Archive.
|
|
|
|
This IA git repository contains no files. But, git-annex in each of the
|
|
~2400 shards knows about it, and by default every Item in every shard
|
|
is recorded as having a copy present in the IA git repository.
|
|
|
|
If the IA lost an Item somehow, this would be reflected by updating
|
|
the git-annex location tracking to say the IA git repository no longer
|
|
contains the item.
|
|
|
|
Creating this repository is simple:
|
|
|
|
git init ia.git
|
|
cd ia.git
|
|
git annex init "The Internet Archive"
|
|
git annex trust .
|
|
|
|
## creating the shards
|
|
|
|
Each shard starts as a clone of the IA git repository.
|
|
|
|
Items are added to the shard, either all at once, or perhaps on-demand.
|
|
|
|
To add an Item to the shard:
|
|
|
|
1. Create a (reproducible checksum) tarball of all the files in the Item
|
|
(probably excluding "derived" files).
|
|
|
|
2. Checksum the tarball and derive a git-annex key, and add it to the git
|
|
repository.
|
|
|
|
The symlink can have a name corresponding to the Item name.
|
|
(Eg "LauraPoitrasCitizenfour.tar" for
|
|
<https://archive.org/details/LauraPoitrasCitizenfour>)
|
|
|
|
The easy way is to write the tarball to disk in the shard's git repo,
|
|
and "git annex add", but it's also possible to do this without ever
|
|
storing the tarball on disk. (The tarball would then be reconstructed
|
|
on the fly each time a client requests to download it.)
|
|
|
|
4. Update git-annex location tracking to indicate that this item
|
|
is present in the Internet Archive.
|
|
|
|
If $iauuid is the UUID of the IA git repository, the command
|
|
is: `setpresentkey $key $iauuid 1` (This command needs git-annex
|
|
5.20141231)
|
|
|
|
5. git commit
|
|
|
|
## adding a client
|
|
|
|
When a client registers to participate:
|
|
|
|
1. Generate a UUID, which is assigned to this client, and send it to the
|
|
client, and assign that UUID to a particular shard.
|
|
2. Send the client an appropriate auth token (eg, a locked down ssh private
|
|
key) to let them access the shard's git repository (or all the shards).
|
|
3. Client clones its assigned shard git repository,
|
|
runs `git annex init reinit $UUID`, and enables direct mode.
|
|
|
|
Note that a client could be assigned to multiple shards, rather than just
|
|
one. Probably good to keep a pool of empty shards that have clients waiting
|
|
for new Items to be added.
|
|
|
|
Note that direct mode seems like a good idea because it lets the user
|
|
easily delete files to free up space.
|
|
|
|
## distributing Items
|
|
|
|
1. Client runs `git annex sync --content`, which downloads as many
|
|
Items from the IA as will fit in their disk's free space
|
|
(leaving some conigurable amount free in reserve by configuring
|
|
annex.diskreserve)
|
|
2. Note that [[numcopies|copies]] and [[preferred_content]] settings can be
|
|
used to make clients only want to download an Item if it's not yet
|
|
reached the desired number of copies. Lots of flexability here in
|
|
git-annex.
|
|
3. git-annex will push back to the server an updated git-annex branch,
|
|
which will record when it has successfully stored an Item.
|
|
|
|
## bad actors
|
|
|
|
Clients can misbehave in probably many ways. The best defense for many
|
|
misbehaviors is to distribute Items to enough different clients that we can
|
|
trust some of them.
|
|
|
|
The main git-annex specific misbehavior is that a client could try to push
|
|
garbage information back to the origin repository on the server.
|
|
|
|
To guard against this, the server will reject all pushes of branches other
|
|
than the git-annex branch, which is the only one clients need to modify.
|
|
|
|
Check pushes of the git-annex branch. There are only a few files that
|
|
clients can legitimately modify, and the modifications will always involve
|
|
that client's UUID, not some other client's UUID. Reject anything shady.
|
|
|
|
These checks can be done in a git `update` hook. Rough estimate is that
|
|
such a hook would be a couple hundred lines of code.
|
|
|
|
## verification
|
|
|
|
We want a lightweight verification process, to verify that a client still
|
|
has the data. This can be done using `git annex fsck`, which can be
|
|
configured to eg, check each file only once per month.
|
|
|
|
git-annex will need a modification here. Currently, a successful fsck
|
|
does not leave any trace in the git-annex branch that it happened. But
|
|
we want the server to track when a client is not fscking (the user probably
|
|
dropped out).
|
|
|
|
The modification is simple; just have a successful fsck
|
|
update the timestamp in the fscked file's location log.
|
|
It will probably take just a few hours to code.
|
|
|
|
With that change, the server can check for files that not enough clients
|
|
have verified they have recently, and distribute them to more clients.
|
|
|
|
Note that bad actors can lie about this verification; it's not a proof they
|
|
still have the file. But, a bad actor could prove they have a file, and
|
|
refuse to give it back if the IA needed to restore the backup, too.
|
|
|
|
## fire drill
|
|
|
|
If we really want to test how well the system is working, we need a fire
|
|
drill.
|
|
|
|
1. Pick some Items that we'll assume the IA has lost in some disaster.
|
|
2. Look up the shard the Item belongs to.
|
|
3. Get the git-annex key of the Item, and tell git-annex it's been
|
|
lost from the IA, by running in its shard: `setpresentkey $key $iauuid 0`
|
|
4. The next time a client runs `git annex sync --content`, it will notice
|
|
that the IA repo doesn't have the Item anymore. The client will then
|
|
send the Item back to the origin repo.
|
|
5. To guard against bad actors, that restored Item should be checked with
|
|
`git annex fsck`. If its checksum is good, it can be re-injected back
|
|
into the IA. (Or, the fire drill was successful.)
|
|
(Remember to turn off the fire alarm by running
|
|
`setpresentkey $key $iauuid 1`)
|
|
|
|
## other optional nice stuff
|
|
|
|
The user running a client can delete some or all of their files at any
|
|
time, to free up disk space. The next time `git-annex sync` runs on the client,
|
|
it'll notice and let the server know, and other clients will then take
|
|
over storing it. (Or if the git-annex assistant is run on the client,
|
|
it would inform the server immediately.)
|
|
|
|
The user is also free to move Items around (within the git repository
|
|
directory), unpack Items to examine their contents, etc. This doesn't
|
|
affect anyone else.
|
|
|
|
Offline storage is supported. As long as the user can spin it up from time
|
|
to time to run `git annex fsck`.
|
|
|
|
More advanced users might have multiple repositories on different disks.
|
|
Each has their own UUID, and they could move Items around between them as
|
|
desired; this would be communicated back to the origin repository
|
|
automatically.
|
|
|
|
Shards could have themes, and users could request to be part of the
|
|
shard that includes Software, or Grateful Dead, etc. This might encourage
|
|
users to devote more resources.
|
|
|
|
Or, rather than doing a lucky dip and getting one or a couple shards,
|
|
a user could clone em all, and pick just which Items to store.
|
|
|
|
The contents of Items sometimes changes.
|
|
This can be reflected by updating an Item's file in the git repository.
|
|
Clients will then download the new version of the Item.
|
|
|
|
Items sometimes go dark; this could be reflected by deleting the item
|
|
from the repository. It's up to the clients what they do with the content
|
|
of such Items.
|
|
|
|
## other potential gotchas
|
|
|
|
If any single Item is very large (eg, 10 terabytes), there may not be
|
|
any clients that can handle it. This could be dealt with by splitting up
|
|
the item into smaller files. Word is there is a single 2 tb item, and a few
|
|
more around 100 gb, so this is probably not a concern.
|
|
|
|
A client could add other files to its local repo, and git-annex branch
|
|
pushes would include junk data about those files. It should probably be
|
|
filtered out by the git update hook (rejecting the whole push because of
|
|
this seems excessive).
|
|
|
|
There may be a thundering herd problem, where many clients end up
|
|
downloading the same Item at the same time, and more copies than neecessary
|
|
result. The next `git annex sync --content` in some of the
|
|
redundant clients will notice this and drop that item, and presumably
|
|
download some other item. However, it might be good to rate limit the
|
|
number of concurrent downloads of a given item, to prevent this and perhaps
|
|
other issues. This could be done by a wrapper around git-annex shell or
|
|
perhaps a git-annex modification.
|