Summary:
When a block based table file is opened, if prefetch_index_and_filter is true, it will prefetch the index and filter blocks, putting them into the block cache.
What this feature adds: when a L0 block based table file is opened, if pin_l0_filter_and_index_blocks_in_cache is true in the options (and prefetch_index_and_filter is true), then the filter and index blocks aren't released back to the block cache at the end of BlockBasedTableReader::Open(). Instead the table reader takes ownership of them, hence pinning them, ie. the LRU cache will never push them out. Meanwhile in the table reader, further accesses will not hit the block cache, thus avoiding lock contention.
When the table reader is destroyed, it releases the pinned blocks (if there were any). This has to happen before the cache is destroyed, so I had to introduce a TableReader::Close(), to guarantee the order of destruction.
Test Plan:
Added two unit tests for this. Existing unit tests run fine (default is pin_l0_filter_and_index_blocks_in_cache=false).
DISABLE_JEMALLOC=1 OPT=-g make all valgrind_check -j32
Mac: OK.
Linux: with D55287 patched in it's OK.
Reviewers: sdong
Reviewed By: sdong
Subscribers: andrewkr, leveldb, dhruba
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D54801
Summary:
When Get() or NewIterator() trigger file loads, skip caching the filter block if
(1) optimize_filters_for_hits is set and (2) the file is on the bottommost
level. Also skip checking filters under the same conditions, which means that
for a preloaded file or a file that was trivially-moved to the bottom level, its
filter block will eventually expire from the cache.
- added parameters/instance variables in various places in order to propagate the config ("skip_filters") from version_set to block_based_table_reader
- in BlockBasedTable::Rep, this optimization prevents filter from being loaded when the file is opened simply by setting filter_policy = nullptr
- in BlockBasedTable::Get/BlockBasedTable::NewIterator, this optimization prevents filter from being used (even if it was loaded already) by setting filter = nullptr
Test Plan:
updated unit test:
$ ./db_test --gtest_filter=DBTest.OptimizeFiltersForHits
will also run 'make check'
Reviewers: sdong, igor, paultuckfield, anthony, rven, kradhakrishnan, IslamAbdelRahman, yhchiang
Reviewed By: yhchiang
Subscribers: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D51633
Summary:
Refactoring NewTableReader to accept TableReaderOptions
This will make it easier to add new options in the future, for example in this diff https://reviews.facebook.net/D46071
Test Plan: run existing tests
Reviewers: igor, yhchiang, anthony, rven, sdong
Reviewed By: sdong
Subscribers: dhruba
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D46179
Summary: Make RocksDb build and run on Windows to be functionally
complete and performant. All existing test cases run with no
regressions. Performance numbers are in the pull-request.
Test plan: make all of the existing unit tests pass, obtain perf numbers.
Co-authored-by: Praveen Rao praveensinghrao@outlook.com
Co-authored-by: Sherlock Huang baihan.huang@gmail.com
Co-authored-by: Alex Zinoviev alexander.zinoviev@me.com
Co-authored-by: Dmitri Smirnov dmitrism@microsoft.com
Summary:
It is experimental. Allow users to return from a call back function TablePropertiesCollector::NeedCompact(), based on the data in the file.
It can be used to allow users to suggest DB to clear up delete tombstones faster.
Test Plan: Add a unit test.
Reviewers: igor, yhchiang, kradhakrishnan, rven
Reviewed By: rven
Subscribers: yoshinorim, MarkCallaghan, maykov, leveldb, dhruba
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D39585
Summary:
Currently users have no idea a key is add, delete or merge from TablePropertiesCollector call back. Add a new function to add it.
Also refactor the codes so that
(1) make table property collector and internal table property collector two separate data structures with the later one now exposed
(2) table builders only receive internal table properties
Test Plan: Add cases in table_properties_collector_test to cover both of old and new ways of using TablePropertiesCollector.
Reviewers: yhchiang, igor.sugak, rven, igor
Reviewed By: rven, igor
Subscribers: meyering, yoshinorim, maykov, leveldb, dhruba
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D35373
