Summary:
Previous I am too ambitious to hide every detail about table factory
to internal api. However, we cannot pass the compilatoin for external
users since we use table factory as the shared_ptr, which requires
the definition of table factory's destructor.
Test Plan: make check;
Reviewers: sdong, haobo
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D15861
Summary: RocksDB doesn't compile on 32-bit architecture apparently. This is attempt to fix some of 32-bit errors. They are reported here: https://gist.github.com/paxos/8789697
Test Plan: RocksDB still compiles on 64-bit :)
Reviewers: kailiu
Reviewed By: kailiu
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D15825
Summary: In PlainTable, use one single byte to represent 8 bytes of internal bytes, if seqID = 0 and it is value type (which should be common for bottom most files). It is to save 7 bytes for uncompressed cases.
Test Plan: make all check
Reviewers: haobo, dhruba, kailiu
Reviewed By: haobo
CC: igor, leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D15489
Summary:
Easy thing goes first. This patch moves arena to internal dir; based
on which, the coming patch will deal with memtable_rep.
Test Plan: make check
Reviewers: haobo, sdong, dhruba
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D15615
Summary: The default settings enable checksum verification on every read.
Test Plan: make check
Reviewers: haobo
Reviewed By: haobo
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D15591
Summary: I think it looks nicer. In RocksDB we have both styles, but I think that static method is the more common version.
Test Plan: backupable_db_test
Reviewers: ljin, benj, swk
Reviewed By: ljin
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D15519
Summary:
Lots of clients have problems with using StackableDB interface. It's nice to have BackupableDB as a layer on top of DB, but not necessary.
This diff exports BackupEngine, which can be used to create backups without forcing clients to use StackableDB interface.
Test Plan: backupable_db_test
Reviewers: dhruba, ljin, swk
Reviewed By: ljin
CC: leveldb, benj
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D15477
Summary:
@dhruba, I'm not sure where we need to sync the directory. I implemented the function in Env() and added the dir sync just after we close the newly created file in the builder.
Should I also add FsyncDir() to new files that get created by a compaction?
Test Plan: Confirmed that FsyncDir is returning Status::OK()
Reviewers: dhruba, haobo
Reviewed By: dhruba
CC: leveldb, dhruba
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14751
Summary: Converting from length prefixed buffer back to internal key costs some CPU but it is not necessary. In this patch, internal keys are pass though the functions so that we don't need to convert back to it.
Test Plan: make all check
Reviewers: haobo, kailiu
Reviewed By: kailiu
CC: igor, leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D15393
Summary: By removing some includes form options.h and reply on forward declaration, we can more easily reason the dependencies.
Test Plan: make all check
Reviewers: kailiu, haobo, igor, dhruba
Reviewed By: kailiu
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D15411
Summary: On a shutdown, freeing memory takes a long time. If we're shutting down, we don't really care about memory leaks. I added a call to Cache that will avoid freeing all objects in cache.
Test Plan:
I created a script to test the speedup and demonstrate how to use the call: https://phabricator.fb.com/P3864368
Clean shutdown took 7.2 seconds, while fast and dirty one took 6.3 seconds. Unfortunately, the speedup is not that big, but should be bigger with bigger block_cache. I have set up the capacity to 80GB, but the script filled up only ~7GB.
Reviewers: dhruba, haobo, MarkCallaghan, xjin
Reviewed By: dhruba
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D15069
Summary: as title
Test Plan:
make all check
What else tests shall I cover?
Reviewers: igor, haobo
CC:
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D15339
Summary:
This diff implements a special type of iterator that doesn't create a snapshot
(can be used to read newly inserted data) and is optimized for doing sequential
reads.
TailingIterator uses current superversion number to determine whether to
invalidate its internal iterators. If the version hasn't changed, it can often
avoid doing expensive seeks over immutable structures (sst files and immutable
memtables).
Test Plan:
* new unit tests
* running LD with this patch
Reviewers: igor, dhruba, haobo, sdong, kailiu
Reviewed By: sdong
CC: leveldb, lovro, march
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D15285
Summary:
This diff takes an even more aggressive way to inline the functions. A decent rule that I followed is "not inline a function if it is more than 10 lines long."
Normally optimizing code by inline is ugly and hard to control, but since one of our usecase has significant amount of CPU used in functions from coding.cc, I'd like to try this diff out.
Test Plan:
1. the size for some .o file increased a little bit, but most less than 1%. So I think the negative impact of inline is negligible.
2. As the regression test shows (ran for 10 times and I calculated the average number)
Metrics Befor After
========================================================================
rocksdb.build.fillseq.qps 426595 444515 (+4.6%)
rocksdb.build.memtablefillrandom.qps 121739 123110
rocksdb.build.memtablereadrandom.qps 1285103 1280520
rocksdb.build.overwrite.qps 125816 135570 (+9%)
rocksdb.build.readrandom_fillunique_random.qps 285995 296863
rocksdb.build.readrandom_memtable_sst.qps 1027132 1027279
rocksdb.build.readrandom.qps 1041427 1054665
rocksdb.build.readrandom_smallblockcache.qps 1028631 1038433
rocksdb.build.readwhilewriting.qps 918352 914629
Reviewers: haobo, sdong, igor
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D15291
Summary: I'm separating code-cleanup part of https://reviews.facebook.net/D14517. This will make D14517 easier to understand and this diff easier to review.
Test Plan: make check
Reviewers: haobo, kailiu, sdong, dhruba, tnovak
Reviewed By: tnovak
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D15099
Summary:
This diff fixes 2 hacks:
* The callback function can modify the existing value inplace, if the merged value fits within the existing buffer size. But currently the existing buffer size is not being modified. Now the callback recieves a int* allowing the size to be modified. Since size is encoded as a varint in the internal key for memtable. It might happen that the entire value might have be copied to the new location if the new size varint is smaller than the existing size varint.
* The callback function has 3 functionalities
1. Modify existing buffer inplace, and update size correspondingly. Now to indicate that, Returns 1.
2. Generate a new buffer indicating merged value. Returns 2.
3. Fails to do either of above, based on whatever application logic. Returns 0.
Test Plan: Just make all for now. I'm adding another unit test to test each scenario.
Reviewers: dhruba, haobo
Reviewed By: haobo
CC: leveldb, sdong, kailiu, xinyaohu, sumeet, danguo
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D15195
Summary:
shared_ptr is slower than unique_ptr (which literally comes with no performance cost compare with raw pointers).
In memtable and memtable rep, we use shared_ptr when we'd actually should use unique_ptr.
According to igor's previous work, we are likely to make quite some performance gain from this diff.
Test Plan: make check
Reviewers: dhruba, igor, sdong, haobo
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D15213
Summary:
When doing CompactRange(), we should first flush the memtable and then calculate max_level_with_files. Also, we want to compact all the levels that have files, including level `max_level_with_files`.
This patch fixed the unit test.
Test Plan: Added a failing unit test and a fix, so it's not failing anymore.
Reviewers: dhruba, haobo, sdong
Reviewed By: haobo
CC: leveldb, xjin
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14421
Summary:
In one of CPU profiles, we see some CPU costs of string::reserve() inside Batch.Put(). This patch should be able to reduce some of the costs by allocating sufficient buffer before hand.
Since it is a trivial percentage of CPU costs, I didn't find a way to show the improvement in one of the benchmarks. I'll deploy it to same application and do the same CPU profiling to make sure those CPU costs are reduced.
Test Plan: make all check
Reviewers: haobo, kailiu, igor
Reviewed By: haobo
CC: leveldb, nkg-
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D15135
Summary:
In one of CPU profiles, we see some CPU costs of string::reserve() inside Batch.Put(). This patch should be able to reduce some of the costs by allocating sufficient buffer before hand.
Since it is a trivial percentage of CPU costs, I didn't find a way to show the improvement in one of the benchmarks. I'll deploy it to same application and do the same CPU profiling to make sure those CPU costs are reduced.
Test Plan: make all check
Reviewers: haobo, kailiu, igor
Reviewed By: haobo
CC: leveldb, nkg-
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D15135
Summary: The application can set a callback function, which is applied on the previous value. And calculates the new value. This new value can be set, either inplace, if the previous value existed in memtable, and new value is smaller than previous value. Otherwise the new value is added normally.
Test Plan: fbmake. Added unit tests. All unit tests pass.
Reviewers: dhruba, haobo
Reviewed By: haobo
CC: sdong, kailiu, xinyaohu, sumeet, leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14745
Summary:
WriteBatch::Data() now is easily to be misuse by users. Also, there is no cheap way for user of WriteBatch to know the data size accumulated. This patch fix the problem by:
(1) return a constant reference to Data() so it's obvious to caller what it means.
(2) add a function to return data size directly
Test Plan: make all check
Reviewers: haobo, igor, kailiu
Reviewed By: kailiu
CC: zshao, leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D15123
Summary:
Added an option (max_successive_merges) that can be used to specify the
maximum number of successive merge operations on a key in the memtable.
This can be used to improve performance of the "get" operation. If many
successive merge operations are performed on a key, the performance of "get"
operations on the key deteriorates, as the value has to be computed for each
"get" operation by applying all the successive merge operations.
FB Task ID: #3428853
Test Plan:
make all check
db_bench --benchmarks=readrandommergerandom
counter_stress_test
Reviewers: haobo, vamsi, dhruba, sdong
Reviewed By: haobo
CC: zshao
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14991
Summary:
In some use cases, table readers for all live files should always be cached. In that case, there will be an opportunity to avoid the table cache look-up while Get() and NewIterator().
We define options.max_open_files = -1 to be the mode that table readers for live files will always be kept. In that mode, table readers are cached in FileMetaData (with a reference count hold in table cache). So that when executing table_cache.Get() and table_cache.newInterator(), LRU cache checking can be by-passed, to reduce latency.
Test Plan: add a test case in db_test
Reviewers: haobo, kailiu
Reviewed By: haobo
CC: dhruba, igor, leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D15039
Summary:
Implement a mem table, in which keys are hashed based on prefixes. In each bucket, entries are organized in a sorted linked list. It has the same thread safety guarantee as skip list.
The motivation is to optimize memory usage for the case that prefix hashing is primary way of seeking to the entry. Compared to hash skip list implementation, this implementation is more memory efficient, but inside each bucket, search is always linear. The target scenario is that there are only very limited number of records in each hash bucket.
Test Plan: Add a test case in db_test
Reviewers: haobo, kailiu, dhruba
Reviewed By: haobo
CC: igor, nkg-, leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14979
Summary:
This diff introduces some features that were requested by two internal customers:
* Ability for backups not to share table files, because we can't guarantee that equal filename means equal content accross replicas
* Ability for two threads to call EnableFileDeletions() and DisableFileDeletions()
* Ability to stop backup from another thread and not slow down the DB close
* Copy the files to the temporary folder first and then atomically rename
Test Plan: Added some tests to backupable_db_test
Reviewers: dhruba, sanketh, muthu, sdong, haobo
Reviewed By: haobo
CC: leveldb, sanketh, muthu
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14769
Summary: Use two vectors for different types of memory allocation.
Test Plan: run all unit tests.
Reviewers: haobo, sdong
Reviewed By: haobo
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D15027
Summary:
We don't want two threads to clash if they concurrently call DisableFileDeletions() and EnableFileDeletions(). I'm adding a counter that will enable file deletions only after all DisableFileDeletions() calls have been negated with EnableFileDeletions().
However, we also don't want to break the old behavior, so I added a parameter force to EnableFileDeletions(). If force is true, we will still enable file deletions after every call to EnableFileDeletions(), which is what is happening now.
Test Plan: make check
Reviewers: dhruba, haobo, sanketh
Reviewed By: dhruba
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14781
Summary:
In some places we have NotFound status created with empty message, but it doesn't avoid a malloc. With this patch, the malloc is avoided for that case.
The motivation of it is that I found in db_bench readrandom test when all keys are not existing, about 4% of the total running time is spent on malloc of Status, plus a similar amount of CPU spent on free of them, which is not necessary.
Test Plan: make all check
Reviewers: dhruba, haobo, igor
Reviewed By: haobo
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14691
Summary:
Some changes to PlainTable format:
(1) support variable key length
(2) use user defined slice transformer to extract prefixes
(3) Run some test cases against PlainTable in db_test and table_test
Test Plan: test db_test
Reviewers: haobo, kailiu
CC: dhruba, igor, leveldb, nkg-
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14457
Summary:
This is the last diff that adds the property block to plain table.
The format resembles that of the block-based table: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/wiki/Rocksdb-table-format
[data block]
[meta block 1: stats block]
[meta block 2: future extended block]
...
[meta block K: future extended block] (we may add more meta blocks in the future)
[metaindex block]
[index block: we only have the placeholder here, we can add persistent index block in the future]
[Footer: contains magic number, handle to metaindex block and index block]
<end_of_file>
Test Plan: extended existing property block test.
Reviewers: haobo, sdong, dhruba
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14523
Summary: This diff will help us to figure out the memory usage for the cache part.
Test Plan: added a new memory usage test for cache
Reviewers: haobo, sdong, dhruba
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14559
Summary: In get operations, merge_operands is only used in few cases. Lazily initialize it can reduce average latency in some cases
Test Plan: make all check
Reviewers: haobo, kailiu, dhruba
Reviewed By: haobo
CC: igor, nkg-, leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14415
Conflicts:
db/db_impl.cc
db/memtable.cc
Summary: as title
Test Plan: dynamic_bloom_test
Reviewers: dhruba, sdong, kailiu
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14385
Summary: We now delete backups with newer sequence number, so the clients don't have to handle confusing situations when they restore from backup.
Test Plan: added a unit test
Reviewers: dhruba
Reviewed By: dhruba
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14547
