| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The storage can easily be corrupted when a build or pull process (or any
process *writing* to the storage) has been killed. The corruption
surfaces in Podman reporting that a given layer could not be found in
the layer tree. Those errors must not be fatal but only logged, such
that the image removal may continue. Otherwise, a user may be unable to
remove an image.
[NO TESTS NEEDED] as I do not yet have a reliable way to cause such a
storage corruption.
Reported-in: https://github.com/containers/podman/issues/8148#issuecomment-787598940
Signed-off-by: Valentin Rothberg <rothberg@redhat.com>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Internally, Podman constructs a tree of layers in containers/storage to
quickly compute relations among layers and hence images. To compute the
tree, we intersect all local layers with all local images. So far,
lookup errors have been fatal which has turned out to be a mistake since
it seems fairly easy to cause storage corruptions, for instance, when
killing builds. In that case, a (partial) image may list a layer which
does not exist (anymore). Since the errors were fatal, there was no
easy way to clean up and many commands were erroring out.
To improve usability, turn the fatal errors into warnings that guide the
user into resolving the issue. In this case, a `podman system reset`
may be the approriate way for now.
[NO TESTS NEEDED] because I have no reliable way to force it.
[1] https://github.com/containers/podman/issues/8148#issuecomment-778253474
Signed-off-by: Valentin Rothberg <rothberg@redhat.com>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Follow up on issue #7444 and make the parent checks more robust.
We can end up with an incoherent storage when, for instance, a
build has been killed.
Signed-off-by: Valentin Rothberg <rothberg@redhat.com>
|
|
|
Listing images has shown increasing performance penalties with an
increasing number of images. Unless `--all` is specified, Podman
will filter intermediate images. Determining intermediate images
has been done by finding (and comparing!) parent images which is
expensive. We had to query the storage many times which turned it
into a bottleneck.
Instead, create a layer tree and assign one or more images to nodes that
match the images' top layer. Determining the children of an image is
now exponentially faster as we already know the child images from the
layer graph and the images using the same top layer, which may also be
considered child images based on their history.
On my system with 510 images, a rootful image list drops from 6 secs
down to 0.3 secs.
Also use the tree to compute parent nodes, and to filter intermediate
images for pruning.
Signed-off-by: Valentin Rothberg <rothberg@redhat.com>
|
