Put architecture.md back into distribution repo
Signed-off-by: Misty Stanley-Jones <misty@docker.com>master
							parent
							
								
									079f5b179d
								
							
						
					
					
						commit
						b0f98e9382
					
				|  | @ -0,0 +1,52 @@ | |||
| --- | ||||
| published: false | ||||
| --- | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| # Architecture | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| ## Design | ||||
| **TODO(stevvooe):** Discuss the architecture of the registry, internally and externally, in a few different deployment scenarios. | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| ### Eventual Consistency | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| > **NOTE:** This section belongs somewhere, perhaps in a design document. We | ||||
| > are leaving this here so the information is not lost. | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| Running the registry on eventually consistent backends has been part of the | ||||
| design from the beginning. This section covers some of the approaches to | ||||
| dealing with this reality. | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| There are a few classes of issues that we need to worry about when | ||||
| implementing something on top of the storage drivers: | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| 1. Read-After-Write consistency (see this [article on | ||||
|    s3](http://shlomoswidler.com/2009/12/read-after-write-consistency-in-amazon.html)). | ||||
| 2. [Write-Write Conflicts](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Write%E2%80%93write_conflict). | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| In reality, the registry must worry about these kinds of errors when doing the | ||||
| following: | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| 1. Accepting data into a temporary upload file may not have latest data block | ||||
|    yet (read-after-write). | ||||
| 2. Moving uploaded data into its blob location (write-write race). | ||||
| 3. Modifying the "current" manifest for given tag (write-write race). | ||||
| 4. A whole slew of operations around deletes (read-after-write, delete-write | ||||
|    races, garbage collection, etc.). | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| The backend path layout employs a few techniques to avoid these problems: | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| 1. Large writes are done to private upload directories. This alleviates most | ||||
|    of the corruption potential under multiple writers by avoiding multiple | ||||
|    writers. | ||||
| 2. Constraints in storage driver implementations, such as support for writing | ||||
|    after the end of a file to extend it. | ||||
| 3. Digest verification to avoid data corruption. | ||||
| 4. Manifest files are stored by digest and cannot change. | ||||
| 5. All other non-content files (links, hashes, etc.) are written as an atomic | ||||
|    unit. Anything that requires additions and deletions is broken out into | ||||
|    separate "files". Last writer still wins. | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| Unfortunately, one must play this game when trying to build something like | ||||
| this on top of eventually consistent storage systems. If we run into serious | ||||
| problems, we can wrap the storagedrivers in a shared consistency layer but | ||||
| that would increase complexity and hinder registry cluster performance. | ||||
		Loading…
	
		Reference in New Issue