At the moment some of the tests (and I cannot point out which ones) of ubuntuone-client fail when they are ran on Windows. The reason for this is due to the way in which we get the notifications out of the file system and the way the tests are written. Before I blame the OS or the tests, let me explain a number of facts about the Windows filesystem and the possible ways to interact with it.
To be able to get file system changes from the OS the Win32 API provides the following:
This function was broken up to Vista when it was fixed, Unfortunately AFAIK we also support Windows XP which means that we cannot trust this function. On top of that taking this path means that we can have a performance issue. Because the function is build on top of Windows messages, if too many changes occur the sync daemon would start receiving roll up messages that just state that something changed and it would be up to the sync daemon to decide what really happened. Therefore we can all agree that this is a no no, right?
This is a really easy function to use which is based on ReadDirectoryChangesW (I think is a simple wrapper around it) that lets you know that something changed but gives no information about what changed. Because if is based on ReadDirectoryChangesW it suffers from the same issues.
This is by far the most common way to get the notification changes from the system. Now, in theory there are two possible cases which can go wrong that would affect the events raised by this function:
- There are too many events and the buffer gets overloaded and we start loosing events. A simple way to solve this issues is to process the events in a diff thread asap so that we can keep reading the changes.
- We use the sync version of the function which means that we could have the following issues:
- Blue screen of death because we used too much memory from the kernel space.
- We cannot close the handles used to watch the changes in the directories. This makes the threads to end up blocked.
As I mentioned this is the theory and therefore makes perfect sense to choose this option as the way to get notified by the changes until… you hit a great little feature of Windows called write-behind caching. The idea of write-behind caching is the following one:
When you attempt to write a new file on your HD Windows does not directly modify the HD. Instead it makes a not of the fact that your intention is to write on disk and saves your changes in memory. Ins’t that smart?
Well, that lovely feature does come set as default AFAIK from XP onwards. Any smart person would wonder how does that interact with FindFirstChangeNotification/ReadDirectoryChangesW, well after some work here is what I have managed to find out:
The IO Manager (internal to the kernel) is queueing up disk-write requests in an internal buffer, and the actual changes are not physically committed until some condition is met which I believe is for the “write-behind caching” feature. The problem appears to be that the user-space callback via FileSystemWatcher/ReadDirectoryChanges does not occur when disk-write requests are inserted into the queue, but rather occurs when they are leaving the queue and being physically committed to disk. For what I have been able to manage through observation, the life time of a queue is based on:
- Whether more writes are being inserted in the q.
- Is another app request a read from an item in the q.
This means that when using FileSystemWatcher/ReadDirectoryChanges the events are fired only when the changes are actually committed and as for a user-space program this follows a non-deterministic process (insert spanish swearing here). a way to work around this issue is to use the FluxhFileBuffers function on the volume, which does need admin rights, yeah!
Well, this allows to track the changes that have been committed in an NTFS system (that means that we do not have support to FAT). This technique allows to keep track of the changes using an update sequence number that keeps track of changes in an interesting manner. At first look, although parsing the data is hard, this solution seems to be very similar to the one used by pyinotify and therefore someone will say, hey, let just ell twisted to do a select on that file and read the changes. Well, no, is not that easy, files do not provide the functionality used for select, just sockets (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa363803%28VS.85%29.aspx) /me jumps of happiness
Well, this is an easy one to summarize, you have to write a driver like piece of code. Means C, COM and being able to crash the entire system with a nice blue screen (although I can change the color to aubergine before we crash)
At this point I hope I have convinced a few to believe that ReadDirectoryChangesW is the best option to take but might be wondering why I mentioned the write-behind caching feature, well here comes my complain towards the tests. We do use the real file system notifications for testing and the trial test cases do have a timeout! Those two facts plus the lovely write-behind caching feature mean that the tests on Windows fail just because the bloody evens are not raise until the leave the q from the IO manager.Read more