For backends which are able to atomically replace files, we just can
overwrite the old copy, if it is necessary to retry an upload. This has
the benefit of issuing one operation less and might be beneficial if a
backend storage, due to bugs or similar, could mix up the order of the
upload and delete calls.
Depending on the used backend, operations started with a canceled
context may fail or not. For example the local backend still works in
large parts when called with a canceled context. Backends transfering
data via http don't work. It is also not possible to retry failed
operations in that state as the RetryBackend will abort with a 'context
canceled' error.
Ensure uniform behavior of all backends by checking for a canceled
context by checking for a canceled context as a first step in the
RetryBackend. This ensures uniform behavior across all backends, as
backends are always wrapped in a RetryBackend.
We now use v4 of the module. `backoff.WithMaxRetries` no longer repeats
an operation endlessly when a retry count of 0 is specified. This
required a few fixes for the tests.
As mentioned in issue [#1560](https://github.com/restic/restic/pull/1560#issuecomment-364689346)
this changes the signature for `backend.Save()`. It now takes a
parameter of interface type `RewindReader`, so that the backend
implementations or our `RetryBackend` middleware can reset the reader to
the beginning and then retry an upload operation.
The `RewindReader` interface also provides a `Length()` method, which is
used in the backend to get the size of the data to be saved. This
removes several ugly hacks we had to do to pull the size back out of the
`io.Reader` passed to `Save()` before. In the `s3` and `rest` backend
this is actively used.
This is a bug fix: Before, when the worker function fn in List() of the
RetryBackend returned an error, the operation is retried with the next
file. This is not consistent with the documentation, the intention was
that when fn returns an error, this is passed on to the caller and the
List() operation is aborted. Only errors happening on the underlying
backend are retried.
The error leads to restic ignoring exclusive locks that are present in
the repo, so it may happen that a new backup is written which references
data that is going to be removed by a concurrently running `prune`
operation.
The bug was reported by a user here:
https://forum.restic.net/t/restic-backup-returns-0-exit-code-when-already-locked/484
Fred