Summary:
Especially after updating to C++17, I don't see a compelling case for
*requiring* any folly components in RocksDB. I was able to purge the existing
hard dependencies, and it can be quite difficult to strip out non-trivial components
from folly for use in RocksDB. (The prospect of doing that on F14 has changed
my mind on the best approach here.)
But this change creates an optional integration where we can plug in
components from folly at compile time, starting here with F14FastMap to replace
std::unordered_map when possible (probably no public APIs for example). I have
replaced the biggest CPU users of std::unordered_map with compile-time
pluggable UnorderedMap which will use F14FastMap when USE_FOLLY is set.
USE_FOLLY is always set in the Meta-internal buck build, and a simulation of
that is in the Makefile for public CI testing. A full folly build is not needed, but
checking out the full folly repo is much simpler for getting the dependency,
and anything else we might want to optionally integrate in the future.
Some picky details:
* I don't think the distributed mutex stuff is actually used, so it was easy to remove.
* I implemented an alternative to `folly::constexpr_log2` (which is much easier
in C++17 than C++11) so that I could pull out the hard dependencies on
`ConstexprMath.h`
* I had to add noexcept move constructors/operators to some types to make
F14's complainUnlessNothrowMoveAndDestroy check happy, and I added a
macro to make that easier in some common cases.
* Updated Meta-internal buck build to use folly F14Map (always)
No updates to HISTORY.md nor INSTALL.md as this is not (yet?) considered a
production integration for open source users.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/9546
Test Plan:
CircleCI tests updated so that a couple of them use folly.
Most internal unit & stress/crash tests updated to use Meta-internal latest folly.
(Note: they should probably use buck but they currently use Makefile.)
Example performance improvement: when filter partitions are pinned in cache,
they are tracked by PartitionedFilterBlockReader::filter_map_ and we can build
a test that exercises that heavily. Build DB with
```
TEST_TMPDIR=/dev/shm/rocksdb ./db_bench -benchmarks=fillrandom -num=10000000 -disable_wal=1 -write_buffer_size=30000000 -bloom_bits=16 -compaction_style=2 -fifo_compaction_max_table_files_size_mb=10000 -fifo_compaction_allow_compaction=0 -partition_index_and_filters
```
and test with (simultaneous runs with & without folly, ~20 times each to see
convergence)
```
TEST_TMPDIR=/dev/shm/rocksdb ./db_bench_folly -readonly -use_existing_db -benchmarks=readrandom -num=10000000 -bloom_bits=16 -compaction_style=2 -fifo_compaction_max_table_files_size_mb=10000 -fifo_compaction_allow_compaction=0 -partition_index_and_filters -duration=40 -pin_l0_filter_and_index_blocks_in_cache
```
Average ops/s no folly: 26229.2
Average ops/s with folly: 26853.3 (+2.4%)
Reviewed By: ajkr
Differential Revision: D34181736
Pulled By: pdillinger
fbshipit-source-id: ffa6ad5104c2880321d8a1aa7187e00ab0d02e94
Summary:
This PR has two commits:
1. Modify the code to allow different Lock Managers (of any kind) to be used. It is implied that a LockManager uses its own custom LockTracker.
2. Add definitions for Range Locking (class Endpoint and GetRangeLock() function.
cheng-chang, is this what you've had in mind (should the PR have both item 1 and item 2?)
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/7443
Reviewed By: zhichao-cao
Differential Revision: D24123172
Pulled By: cheng-chang
fbshipit-source-id: c6548ad6d4cc3c25f68d13b29147bc6fdf357185
Summary:
When `ASSERT_STATUS_CHECKED` is enabled, `transaction_test` does not pass without this PR.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/7572
Test Plan: `ASSERT_STATUS_CHECKED=1 make -j32 transaction_test && ./transaction_test`
Reviewed By: zhichao-cao
Differential Revision: D24404319
Pulled By: cheng-chang
fbshipit-source-id: 13689035995366ab06d8eada3ea404e45fef8bc5
Summary:
In order to be able to introduce more locking protocols, we need to abstract out the locking subsystem in TransactionDB into a set of interfaces.
PR https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/7013 introduces interface `LockTracker`. This PR is a follow up to take the first step to abstract out a `LockManager` interface.
Further modifications to the interface may be needed when introducing the first implementation of range lock. But the idea here is to put the range lock implementation based on range tree under the `utilities/transactions/lock/range/range_tree`.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/7532
Test Plan: point_lock_manager_test
Reviewed By: ajkr
Differential Revision: D24238731
Pulled By: cheng-chang
fbshipit-source-id: 2a9458cd8b3fb008d9529dbc4d3b28c24631f463
