Summary: The preprocessor does not follow normal rules of && evaluation, tries to evaluate __GLIBC_PREREQ(2, 12) even though the defined() check fails. This breaks the build if __GLIBC_PREREQ is absent.
Test Plan: Try adding #undef __GLIBC_PREREQ above the offending line, build no longer breaks
Reviewed By: igor
Blame Rev: 4c81383628
Summary:
The commit at 27bbef1180 had a memory leak
that was detected by valgrind. The memtable that has a refcount decrement
in MemTableList::InstallMemtableFlushResults was not freed.
Test Plan: valgrind ./db_test --leak-check=full
Reviewers: igor
Reviewed By: igor
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14391
Summary: Added readrandom benchmark with 300MB block cache, while database has 1GB of data
Test Plan: Ran it
Reviewers: dhruba, MarkCallaghan
Reviewed By: dhruba
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14373
Summary: These tests fail if compression libraries are not installed.
Test Plan: Manually disabled snappy, observed tests not ran.
Reviewers: dhruba, kailiu
Reviewed By: dhruba
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14379
Summary: Makes it easier to monitor performance with top
Test Plan: ./manual_compaction_test with `top -H` running. Previously was two `manual_compacti`, now one shows `rocksdb:bg0`.
Reviewers: igor, dhruba
Reviewed By: igor
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14367
Summary: As title. Especially, HashSkipListRepFactory will be able to specify a relatively small height, to reduce the memory overhead of one skiplist per bucket.
Test Plan: make check and test it on leaf4
Reviewers: dhruba, sdong, kailiu
CC: reconnect.grayhat, leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14307
Summary:
Fix a stupid bug I just introduced in b59d4d5a50, which I didn't even mean to include.
GCC might remove the munmap.
Test Plan: Run it and make sure munmap succeeds
Reviewers: haobo, kailiu
Reviewed By: kailiu
CC: dhruba, reconnect.grayhat, leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14361
Summary:
This code path can potentially accumulate multiple important_files for level 0.
But for other levels, it should have only one file in the
important_files, so it is ok not to reserve excessive space, is it not?
Test Plan: make check
Reviewers: haobo
Reviewed By: haobo
CC: reconnect.grayhat, leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14349
Summary:
Large memory allocations and frees are costly and best done outside the
db-mutex. The memtables are already allocated outside the db-mutex but
they were being freed while holding the db-mutex.
This patch frees obsolete memtables outside the db-mutex.
Test Plan:
make check
db_stress
Unit tests pass, I am in the process of running stress tests.
Reviewers: haobo, igor, emayanke
Reviewed By: haobo
CC: reconnect.grayhat, leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14319
Summary: We need access to options for BackupableDB
Test Plan: make check
Reviewers: dhruba
Reviewed By: dhruba
CC: leveldb, reconnect.grayhat
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14331
Summary: The old regression tests didn't cover memtable part at all. This is an atempt to also measure memtable performance in regression tests.
Test Plan: Ran regression_build_test.sh
Reviewers: dhruba, haobo, kailiu, emayanke
Reviewed By: dhruba
CC: leveldb, reconnect.grayhat
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14325
Summary: This is part of https://reviews.facebook.net/D14295 -- smaller diff that is easier to review
Test Plan: make asan_check
Reviewers: dhruba, haobo, emayanke
Reviewed By: emayanke
CC: leveldb, kailiu, reconnect.grayhat
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14301
Summary:
All filesystem Io should be done outside the dbmutex. There was one place
when we have to roll the transaction log that we were creating the new log file
while holding the dbmutex.
I rearranged this code so that the act of creating the new transaction log
file is done without holding the dbmutex. I also allocate the new memtable
outside the dbmutex, this is important because creating the memtable
could be heavyweight.
Test Plan: make check and dbstress
Reviewers: haobo, igor
Reviewed By: haobo
CC: leveldb, reconnect.grayhat
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14283
Summary: liveness of the statistics object is already ensured by the shared pointer in DB options. There's no reason to pass again shared pointer among internal functions. Raw pointer is sufficient and efficient.
Test Plan: make check
Reviewers: dhruba, MarkCallaghan, igor
Reviewed By: dhruba
CC: leveldb, reconnect.grayhat
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14289
Summary:
Provide a framework to profile a query in detail to figure out latency bottleneck. Currently, in Get(), Put() and iterators, 2-3 simple timing is used. We can easily add more profile counters to the framework later.
Test Plan: Enable this profiling in seveal existing tests.
Reviewers: haobo, dhruba, kailiu, emayanke, vamsi, igor
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14001
Conflicts:
table/merger.cc
Summary:
Provide a framework to profile a query in detail to figure out latency bottleneck. Currently, in Get(), Put() and iterators, 2-3 simple timing is used. We can easily add more profile counters to the framework later.
Test Plan: Enable this profiling in seveal existing tests.
Reviewers: haobo, dhruba, kailiu, emayanke, vamsi, igor
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14001
Summary:
For prefix mem tables, encoding mem table key may be unnecessary if the prefix doesn't have any key. This patch is a little bit hacky but I want to try out the performance gain of removing this lazy initialization.
In longer term, we might want to revisit the way we abstract mem tables implementations.
Test Plan: make all check
Reviewers: haobo, igor, kailiu
Reviewed By: igor
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14265
Summary:
A Simple plain table format. No block structure. When creating the table reader, scanning the full table to create indexes.
Test Plan:Add unit test
Reviewers:haobo,dhruba,kailiu
CC:
Task ID: #
Blame Rev:
Summary:
Machine several functions inline.
Also, in DBIter.Seek() make value cleaning up lazily done.
These are for the use case that Seek() are called lots of times but few return values.
Test Plan: make all check
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14217
Summary:
For the use cases that prefix filtering is enabled, initializing heaps when doing MergingIterator.Seek() might introduce non-negligible costs. This patch makes it lazily done.
Test Plan: make all check
Reviewers: haobo,dhruba,kailiu
CC:
Task ID: #
Blame Rev:
Summary: trivia comment change
Test Plan: Go through the step ofs developing under the performance branch
Reviewers: dhruba, kailiu, sdong
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14259
Summary: user comparator needs to work if either input is prefix only.
Test Plan: ./prefix_test --write_buffer_size=100000 --total_prefixes=10000 --items_per_prefix=10
Reviewers: dhruba, igor
Reviewed By: igor
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14241
Summary:
Previously we introduce a `flush_block_policy_factory` in Options, however, that options is strongly releated to Table based tables.
It will make more sense to move it to block based table's own factory class.
Test Plan: make check to pass existing tests
Reviewers: dhruba, haobo
Reviewed By: dhruba
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14211
Summary:
These bugs were caught by ASAN crash test.
1. The first one, in table/filter_block.cc is very nasty. We first reference entries_ and store the reference to Slice prev. Then, we call entries_.append(), which can change the reference. The Slice prev now points to junk.
2. The second one is a bug in a test, so it's not very serious. Once we set read_opts.prefix, we never clear it, so some other function might still reference it.
Test Plan: asan crash test now runs more than 5 mins. Before, it failed immediately. I will run the full one, but the full one takes quite some time (5 hours)
Reviewers: dhruba, haobo, kailiu
Reviewed By: dhruba
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14223
