Summary: It turns out that -Wshadow has different rules for gcc than clang. Previous commit fixed clang. This commits fixes the rest of the warnings for gcc.
Test Plan: compiles
Reviewers: ljin, yhchiang, rven, sdong
Reviewed By: sdong
Subscribers: dhruba, leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D28131
Check for lhs and not twice for rhs.
Fix for:
[utilities/document/document_db.cc:36] ->
[utilities/document/document_db.cc:36]: (style) Same expression on both
sides of '&&'.
Signed-off-by: Danny Al-Gaaf <danny.al-gaaf@bisect.de>
Summary:
I will move compression related options in a separate diff since this
diff is already pretty lengthy.
I guess I will also need to change JNI accordingly :(
Test Plan: make all check
Reviewers: yhchiang, igor, sdong
Reviewed By: igor
Subscribers: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D21915
Summary:
All public headers need to be under `include/rocksdb` directory. Otherwise, clients include our header files like this:
#include <rocksdb/db.h>
#include <utilities/backupable_db.h> // still our public header!
Also, internally, we include:
#include "utilities/backupable/backupable_db.h" // internal header
#include "utilities/backupable_db.h" // public header
which is confusing.
This way, when we install rocksdb as a system library, we can just copy `include/rocksdb` directory to system's header files. We can't really copy `utilities` directory to system's header files.
Test Plan: compiles
Reviewers: dhruba, ljin, yhchiang, sdong
Reviewed By: sdong
Subscribers: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D20409
Summary:
This is a rough sketch of our new document API. Would like to get some thoughts and comments about the high-level architecture and API.
I didn't optimize for performance at all. Leaving some low-hanging fruit so that we can be happy when we fix them! :)
Currently, bunch of features are not supported at all. Indexes can be only specified when creating database. There is no query planner whatsoever. This will all be added in due time.
Test Plan: Added a simple unit test
Reviewers: haobo, yhchiang, dhruba, sdong, ljin
Reviewed By: ljin
Subscribers: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D18747
Summary:
After evaluating options for JSON storage, I decided to implement our own. The reason is that we'll be able to optimize it better and we get to reduce unnecessary dependencies (which is what we'd get with folly).
I also plan to write a serializer/deserializer for JSONDocument with our own binary format similar to BSON. That way we'll store binary JSON format in RocksDB instead of the plain-text JSON. This means less storage and faster deserialization.
There are still some inefficiencies left here. I plan to optimize them after we develop a functioning DocumentDB. That way we can move and iterate faster.
Test Plan: added a unit test
Reviewers: dhruba, haobo, sdong, ljin, yhchiang
Reviewed By: haobo
Subscribers: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D18831
