Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
// Copyright (c) 2018-present, Facebook, Inc. All rights reserved.
|
|
|
|
// This source code is licensed under both the GPLv2 (found in the
|
|
|
|
// COPYING file in the root directory) and Apache 2.0 License
|
|
|
|
// (found in the LICENSE.Apache file in the root directory).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#include "db/range_tombstone_fragmenter.h"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#include <algorithm>
|
|
|
|
#include <functional>
|
|
|
|
#include <set>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#include <inttypes.h>
|
|
|
|
#include <stdio.h>
|
|
|
|
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
#include "util/autovector.h"
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
#include "util/kv_map.h"
|
|
|
|
#include "util/vector_iterator.h"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
namespace rocksdb {
|
|
|
|
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
FragmentedRangeTombstoneList::FragmentedRangeTombstoneList(
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
std::unique_ptr<InternalIterator> unfragmented_tombstones,
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
const InternalKeyComparator& icmp, bool one_time_use,
|
|
|
|
SequenceNumber snapshot) {
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
if (unfragmented_tombstones == nullptr) {
|
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
bool is_sorted = true;
|
|
|
|
int num_tombstones = 0;
|
|
|
|
InternalKey pinned_last_start_key;
|
|
|
|
Slice last_start_key;
|
|
|
|
for (unfragmented_tombstones->SeekToFirst(); unfragmented_tombstones->Valid();
|
|
|
|
unfragmented_tombstones->Next(), num_tombstones++) {
|
|
|
|
if (num_tombstones > 0 &&
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
icmp.Compare(last_start_key, unfragmented_tombstones->key()) > 0) {
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
is_sorted = false;
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
if (unfragmented_tombstones->IsKeyPinned()) {
|
|
|
|
last_start_key = unfragmented_tombstones->key();
|
|
|
|
} else {
|
|
|
|
pinned_last_start_key.DecodeFrom(unfragmented_tombstones->key());
|
|
|
|
last_start_key = pinned_last_start_key.Encode();
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
if (is_sorted) {
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
FragmentTombstones(std::move(unfragmented_tombstones), icmp, one_time_use,
|
|
|
|
snapshot);
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Sort the tombstones before fragmenting them.
|
|
|
|
std::vector<std::string> keys, values;
|
|
|
|
keys.reserve(num_tombstones);
|
|
|
|
values.reserve(num_tombstones);
|
|
|
|
for (unfragmented_tombstones->SeekToFirst(); unfragmented_tombstones->Valid();
|
|
|
|
unfragmented_tombstones->Next()) {
|
|
|
|
keys.emplace_back(unfragmented_tombstones->key().data(),
|
|
|
|
unfragmented_tombstones->key().size());
|
|
|
|
values.emplace_back(unfragmented_tombstones->value().data(),
|
|
|
|
unfragmented_tombstones->value().size());
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// VectorIterator implicitly sorts by key during construction.
|
|
|
|
auto iter = std::unique_ptr<VectorIterator>(
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
new VectorIterator(std::move(keys), std::move(values), &icmp));
|
|
|
|
FragmentTombstones(std::move(iter), icmp, one_time_use, snapshot);
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
void FragmentedRangeTombstoneList::FragmentTombstones(
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
std::unique_ptr<InternalIterator> unfragmented_tombstones,
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
const InternalKeyComparator& icmp, bool one_time_use,
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
SequenceNumber snapshot) {
|
|
|
|
Slice cur_start_key(nullptr, 0);
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
auto cmp = ParsedInternalKeyComparator(&icmp);
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Stores the end keys and sequence numbers of range tombstones with a start
|
|
|
|
// key less than or equal to cur_start_key. Provides an ordering by end key
|
|
|
|
// for use in flush_current_tombstones.
|
|
|
|
std::set<ParsedInternalKey, ParsedInternalKeyComparator> cur_end_keys(cmp);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Given the next start key in unfragmented_tombstones,
|
|
|
|
// flush_current_tombstones writes every tombstone fragment that starts
|
|
|
|
// and ends with a key before next_start_key, and starts with a key greater
|
|
|
|
// than or equal to cur_start_key.
|
|
|
|
auto flush_current_tombstones = [&](const Slice& next_start_key) {
|
|
|
|
auto it = cur_end_keys.begin();
|
|
|
|
bool reached_next_start_key = false;
|
|
|
|
for (; it != cur_end_keys.end() && !reached_next_start_key; ++it) {
|
|
|
|
Slice cur_end_key = it->user_key;
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
if (icmp.user_comparator()->Compare(cur_start_key, cur_end_key) == 0) {
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
// Empty tombstone.
|
|
|
|
continue;
|
|
|
|
}
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
if (icmp.user_comparator()->Compare(next_start_key, cur_end_key) <= 0) {
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
// All of the end keys in [it, cur_end_keys.end()) are after
|
|
|
|
// next_start_key, so the tombstones they represent can be used in
|
|
|
|
// fragments that start with keys greater than or equal to
|
|
|
|
// next_start_key. However, the end keys we already passed will not be
|
|
|
|
// used in any more tombstone fragments.
|
|
|
|
//
|
|
|
|
// Remove the fully fragmented tombstones and stop iteration after a
|
|
|
|
// final round of flushing to preserve the tombstones we can create more
|
|
|
|
// fragments from.
|
|
|
|
reached_next_start_key = true;
|
|
|
|
cur_end_keys.erase(cur_end_keys.begin(), it);
|
|
|
|
cur_end_key = next_start_key;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Flush a range tombstone fragment [cur_start_key, cur_end_key), which
|
|
|
|
// should not overlap with the last-flushed tombstone fragment.
|
|
|
|
assert(tombstones_.empty() ||
|
|
|
|
icmp.user_comparator()->Compare(tombstones_.back().end_key,
|
|
|
|
cur_start_key) <= 0);
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
if (one_time_use) {
|
|
|
|
SequenceNumber max_seqnum = 0;
|
|
|
|
for (auto flush_it = it; flush_it != cur_end_keys.end(); ++flush_it) {
|
|
|
|
max_seqnum = std::max(max_seqnum, flush_it->sequence);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
size_t start_idx = tombstone_seqs_.size();
|
|
|
|
tombstone_seqs_.push_back(max_seqnum);
|
|
|
|
tombstones_.emplace_back(cur_start_key, cur_end_key, start_idx,
|
|
|
|
start_idx + 1);
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
} else {
|
|
|
|
// Sort the sequence numbers of the tombstones being fragmented in
|
|
|
|
// descending order, and then flush them in that order.
|
|
|
|
autovector<SequenceNumber> seqnums_to_flush;
|
|
|
|
for (auto flush_it = it; flush_it != cur_end_keys.end(); ++flush_it) {
|
|
|
|
seqnums_to_flush.push_back(flush_it->sequence);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
std::sort(seqnums_to_flush.begin(), seqnums_to_flush.end(),
|
|
|
|
std::greater<SequenceNumber>());
|
|
|
|
size_t start_idx = tombstone_seqs_.size();
|
|
|
|
size_t end_idx = start_idx + seqnums_to_flush.size();
|
|
|
|
tombstone_seqs_.insert(tombstone_seqs_.end(), seqnums_to_flush.begin(),
|
|
|
|
seqnums_to_flush.end());
|
|
|
|
tombstones_.emplace_back(cur_start_key, cur_end_key, start_idx,
|
|
|
|
end_idx);
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
cur_start_key = cur_end_key;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
if (!reached_next_start_key) {
|
|
|
|
// There is a gap between the last flushed tombstone fragment and
|
|
|
|
// the next tombstone's start key. Remove all the end keys in
|
|
|
|
// the working set, since we have fully fragmented their corresponding
|
|
|
|
// tombstones.
|
|
|
|
cur_end_keys.clear();
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
cur_start_key = next_start_key;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
pinned_iters_mgr_.StartPinning();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
bool no_tombstones = true;
|
|
|
|
for (unfragmented_tombstones->SeekToFirst(); unfragmented_tombstones->Valid();
|
|
|
|
unfragmented_tombstones->Next()) {
|
|
|
|
const Slice& ikey = unfragmented_tombstones->key();
|
|
|
|
Slice tombstone_start_key = ExtractUserKey(ikey);
|
|
|
|
SequenceNumber tombstone_seq = GetInternalKeySeqno(ikey);
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
if (one_time_use && tombstone_seq > snapshot) {
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
// The tombstone is not visible by this snapshot.
|
|
|
|
continue;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
no_tombstones = false;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Slice tombstone_end_key = unfragmented_tombstones->value();
|
|
|
|
if (!unfragmented_tombstones->IsValuePinned()) {
|
|
|
|
pinned_slices_.emplace_back(tombstone_end_key.data(),
|
|
|
|
tombstone_end_key.size());
|
|
|
|
tombstone_end_key = pinned_slices_.back();
|
|
|
|
}
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
if (!cur_end_keys.empty() && icmp.user_comparator()->Compare(
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
cur_start_key, tombstone_start_key) != 0) {
|
|
|
|
// The start key has changed. Flush all tombstones that start before
|
|
|
|
// this new start key.
|
|
|
|
flush_current_tombstones(tombstone_start_key);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
if (unfragmented_tombstones->IsKeyPinned()) {
|
|
|
|
cur_start_key = tombstone_start_key;
|
|
|
|
} else {
|
|
|
|
pinned_slices_.emplace_back(tombstone_start_key.data(),
|
|
|
|
tombstone_start_key.size());
|
|
|
|
cur_start_key = pinned_slices_.back();
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cur_end_keys.emplace(tombstone_end_key, tombstone_seq, kTypeRangeDeletion);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
if (!cur_end_keys.empty()) {
|
|
|
|
ParsedInternalKey last_end_key = *std::prev(cur_end_keys.end());
|
|
|
|
flush_current_tombstones(last_end_key.user_key);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (!no_tombstones) {
|
|
|
|
pinned_iters_mgr_.PinIterator(unfragmented_tombstones.release(),
|
|
|
|
false /* arena */);
|
|
|
|
}
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FragmentedRangeTombstoneIterator::FragmentedRangeTombstoneIterator(
|
|
|
|
const FragmentedRangeTombstoneList* tombstones, SequenceNumber snapshot,
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
const InternalKeyComparator& icmp)
|
|
|
|
: tombstone_start_cmp_(icmp.user_comparator()),
|
|
|
|
tombstone_end_cmp_(icmp.user_comparator()),
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
ucmp_(icmp.user_comparator()),
|
|
|
|
tombstones_(tombstones),
|
|
|
|
snapshot_(snapshot) {
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
assert(tombstones_ != nullptr);
|
|
|
|
pos_ = tombstones_->end();
|
|
|
|
pinned_pos_ = tombstones_->end();
|
|
|
|
}
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
FragmentedRangeTombstoneIterator::FragmentedRangeTombstoneIterator(
|
|
|
|
const std::shared_ptr<const FragmentedRangeTombstoneList>& tombstones,
|
|
|
|
SequenceNumber snapshot, const InternalKeyComparator& icmp)
|
|
|
|
: tombstone_start_cmp_(icmp.user_comparator()),
|
|
|
|
tombstone_end_cmp_(icmp.user_comparator()),
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
ucmp_(icmp.user_comparator()),
|
|
|
|
tombstones_ref_(tombstones),
|
|
|
|
tombstones_(tombstones_ref_.get()),
|
|
|
|
snapshot_(snapshot) {
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
assert(tombstones_ != nullptr);
|
|
|
|
pos_ = tombstones_->end();
|
|
|
|
seq_pos_ = tombstones_->seq_end();
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
pinned_pos_ = tombstones_->end();
|
|
|
|
pinned_seq_pos_ = tombstones_->seq_end();
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void FragmentedRangeTombstoneIterator::SeekToFirst() {
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
pos_ = tombstones_->begin();
|
|
|
|
seq_pos_ = tombstones_->seq_begin();
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void FragmentedRangeTombstoneIterator::SeekToTopFirst() {
|
|
|
|
if (tombstones_->empty()) {
|
|
|
|
Invalidate();
|
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
pos_ = tombstones_->begin();
|
|
|
|
seq_pos_ = std::lower_bound(tombstones_->seq_iter(pos_->seq_start_idx),
|
|
|
|
tombstones_->seq_iter(pos_->seq_end_idx),
|
|
|
|
snapshot_, std::greater<SequenceNumber>());
|
|
|
|
ScanForwardToVisibleTombstone();
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
void FragmentedRangeTombstoneIterator::SeekToLast() {
|
|
|
|
pos_ = std::prev(tombstones_->end());
|
|
|
|
seq_pos_ = std::prev(tombstones_->seq_end());
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void FragmentedRangeTombstoneIterator::SeekToTopLast() {
|
|
|
|
if (tombstones_->empty()) {
|
|
|
|
Invalidate();
|
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
pos_ = std::prev(tombstones_->end());
|
|
|
|
seq_pos_ = std::lower_bound(tombstones_->seq_iter(pos_->seq_start_idx),
|
|
|
|
tombstones_->seq_iter(pos_->seq_end_idx),
|
|
|
|
snapshot_, std::greater<SequenceNumber>());
|
|
|
|
ScanBackwardToVisibleTombstone();
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void FragmentedRangeTombstoneIterator::Seek(const Slice& target) {
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
if (tombstones_->empty()) {
|
|
|
|
Invalidate();
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
SeekToCoveringTombstone(target);
|
|
|
|
ScanForwardToVisibleTombstone();
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void FragmentedRangeTombstoneIterator::SeekForPrev(const Slice& target) {
|
|
|
|
if (tombstones_->empty()) {
|
|
|
|
Invalidate();
|
|
|
|
return;
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
SeekForPrevToCoveringTombstone(target);
|
|
|
|
ScanBackwardToVisibleTombstone();
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void FragmentedRangeTombstoneIterator::SeekToCoveringTombstone(
|
|
|
|
const Slice& target) {
|
|
|
|
pos_ = std::upper_bound(tombstones_->begin(), tombstones_->end(), target,
|
|
|
|
tombstone_end_cmp_);
|
|
|
|
if (pos_ == tombstones_->end()) {
|
|
|
|
// All tombstones end before target.
|
|
|
|
seq_pos_ = tombstones_->seq_end();
|
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
seq_pos_ = std::lower_bound(tombstones_->seq_iter(pos_->seq_start_idx),
|
|
|
|
tombstones_->seq_iter(pos_->seq_end_idx),
|
|
|
|
snapshot_, std::greater<SequenceNumber>());
|
|
|
|
}
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void FragmentedRangeTombstoneIterator::SeekForPrevToCoveringTombstone(
|
|
|
|
const Slice& target) {
|
|
|
|
if (tombstones_->empty()) {
|
|
|
|
Invalidate();
|
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
pos_ = std::upper_bound(tombstones_->begin(), tombstones_->end(), target,
|
|
|
|
tombstone_start_cmp_);
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
if (pos_ == tombstones_->begin()) {
|
|
|
|
// All tombstones start after target.
|
|
|
|
Invalidate();
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
--pos_;
|
|
|
|
seq_pos_ = std::lower_bound(tombstones_->seq_iter(pos_->seq_start_idx),
|
|
|
|
tombstones_->seq_iter(pos_->seq_end_idx),
|
|
|
|
snapshot_, std::greater<SequenceNumber>());
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void FragmentedRangeTombstoneIterator::ScanForwardToVisibleTombstone() {
|
|
|
|
while (pos_ != tombstones_->end() &&
|
|
|
|
seq_pos_ == tombstones_->seq_iter(pos_->seq_end_idx)) {
|
|
|
|
++pos_;
|
|
|
|
if (pos_ == tombstones_->end()) {
|
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
seq_pos_ = std::lower_bound(tombstones_->seq_iter(pos_->seq_start_idx),
|
|
|
|
tombstones_->seq_iter(pos_->seq_end_idx),
|
|
|
|
snapshot_, std::greater<SequenceNumber>());
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void FragmentedRangeTombstoneIterator::ScanBackwardToVisibleTombstone() {
|
|
|
|
while (pos_ != tombstones_->end() &&
|
|
|
|
seq_pos_ == tombstones_->seq_iter(pos_->seq_end_idx)) {
|
|
|
|
if (pos_ == tombstones_->begin()) {
|
|
|
|
Invalidate();
|
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
--pos_;
|
|
|
|
seq_pos_ = std::lower_bound(tombstones_->seq_iter(pos_->seq_start_idx),
|
|
|
|
tombstones_->seq_iter(pos_->seq_end_idx),
|
|
|
|
snapshot_, std::greater<SequenceNumber>());
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void FragmentedRangeTombstoneIterator::Next() {
|
|
|
|
++seq_pos_;
|
|
|
|
if (seq_pos_ == tombstones_->seq_iter(pos_->seq_end_idx)) {
|
|
|
|
++pos_;
|
|
|
|
}
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void FragmentedRangeTombstoneIterator::TopNext() {
|
|
|
|
++pos_;
|
|
|
|
if (pos_ == tombstones_->end()) {
|
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
seq_pos_ = std::lower_bound(tombstones_->seq_iter(pos_->seq_start_idx),
|
|
|
|
tombstones_->seq_iter(pos_->seq_end_idx),
|
|
|
|
snapshot_, std::greater<SequenceNumber>());
|
|
|
|
ScanForwardToVisibleTombstone();
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void FragmentedRangeTombstoneIterator::Prev() {
|
|
|
|
if (seq_pos_ == tombstones_->seq_begin()) {
|
|
|
|
pos_ = tombstones_->end();
|
|
|
|
seq_pos_ = tombstones_->seq_end();
|
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
--seq_pos_;
|
|
|
|
if (pos_ == tombstones_->end() ||
|
|
|
|
seq_pos_ == tombstones_->seq_iter(pos_->seq_start_idx - 1)) {
|
|
|
|
--pos_;
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
Cache fragmented range tombstones in BlockBasedTableReader (#4493)
Summary:
This allows tombstone fragmenting to only be performed when the table is opened, and cached for subsequent accesses.
On the same DB used in #4449, running `readrandom` results in the following:
```
readrandom : 0.983 micros/op 1017076 ops/sec; 78.3 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Now that Get performance in the presence of range tombstones is reasonable, I also compared the performance between a DB with range tombstones, "expanded" range tombstones (several point tombstones that cover the same keys the equivalent range tombstone would cover, a common workaround for DeleteRange), and no range tombstones. The created DBs had 5 million keys each, and DeleteRange was called at regular intervals (depending on the total number of range tombstones being written) after 4.5 million Puts. The table below summarizes the results of a `readwhilewriting` benchmark (in order to provide somewhat more realistic results):
```
Tombstones? | avg micros/op | stddev micros/op | avg ops/s | stddev ops/s
----------------- | ------------- | ---------------- | ------------ | ------------
None | 0.6186 | 0.04637 | 1,625,252.90 | 124,679.41
500 Expanded | 0.6019 | 0.03628 | 1,666,670.40 | 101,142.65
500 Unexpanded | 0.6435 | 0.03994 | 1,559,979.40 | 104,090.52
1k Expanded | 0.6034 | 0.04349 | 1,665,128.10 | 125,144.57
1k Unexpanded | 0.6261 | 0.03093 | 1,600,457.50 | 79,024.94
5k Expanded | 0.6163 | 0.05926 | 1,636,668.80 | 154,888.85
5k Unexpanded | 0.6402 | 0.04002 | 1,567,804.70 | 100,965.55
10k Expanded | 0.6036 | 0.05105 | 1,667,237.70 | 142,830.36
10k Unexpanded | 0.6128 | 0.02598 | 1,634,633.40 | 72,161.82
25k Expanded | 0.6198 | 0.04542 | 1,620,980.50 | 116,662.93
25k Unexpanded | 0.5478 | 0.0362 | 1,833,059.10 | 121,233.81
50k Expanded | 0.5104 | 0.04347 | 1,973,107.90 | 184,073.49
50k Unexpanded | 0.4528 | 0.03387 | 2,219,034.50 | 170,984.32
```
After a large enough quantity of range tombstones are written, range tombstone Gets can become faster than reading from an equivalent DB with several point tombstones.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4493
Differential Revision: D10842844
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: a7d44534f8120e6aabb65779d26c6b9df954c509
6 years ago
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void FragmentedRangeTombstoneIterator::TopPrev() {
|
|
|
|
if (pos_ == tombstones_->begin()) {
|
|
|
|
Invalidate();
|
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
--pos_;
|
|
|
|
seq_pos_ = std::lower_bound(tombstones_->seq_iter(pos_->seq_start_idx),
|
|
|
|
tombstones_->seq_iter(pos_->seq_end_idx),
|
|
|
|
snapshot_, std::greater<SequenceNumber>());
|
|
|
|
ScanBackwardToVisibleTombstone();
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
bool FragmentedRangeTombstoneIterator::Valid() const {
|
|
|
|
return tombstones_ != nullptr && pos_ != tombstones_->end();
|
|
|
|
}
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SequenceNumber FragmentedRangeTombstoneIterator::MaxCoveringTombstoneSeqnum(
|
|
|
|
const Slice& user_key) {
|
|
|
|
SeekToCoveringTombstone(user_key);
|
|
|
|
return ValidPos() && ucmp_->Compare(start_key(), user_key) <= 0 ? seq() : 0;
|
Use only "local" range tombstones during Get (#4449)
Summary:
Previously, range tombstones were accumulated from every level, which
was necessary if a range tombstone in a higher level covered a key in a lower
level. However, RangeDelAggregator::AddTombstones's complexity is based on
the number of tombstones that are currently stored in it, which is wasteful in
the Get case, where we only need to know the highest sequence number of range
tombstones that cover the key from higher levels, and compute the highest covering
sequence number at the current level. This change introduces this optimization, and
removes the use of RangeDelAggregator from the Get path.
In the benchmark results, the following command was used to initialize the database:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts -use_existing_db=false -benchmarks=filluniquerandom -write_buffer_size=1048576 -compression_type=lz4 -target_file_size_base=1048576 -max_bytes_for_level_base=4194304 -value_size=112 -key_size=16 -block_size=4096 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -num=5000000 -max_background_jobs=12 -benchmark_write_rate_limit=20971520 -range_tombstone_width=100 -writes_per_range_tombstone=100 -max_num_range_tombstones=50000 -bloom_bits=8
```
...and the following command was used to measure read throughput:
```
./db_bench -db=/dev/shm/5k-rts/ -use_existing_db=true -benchmarks=readrandom -disable_auto_compactions=true -num=5000000 -reads=100000 -threads=32
```
The filluniquerandom command was only run once, and the resulting database was used
to measure read performance before and after the PR. Both binaries were compiled with
`DEBUG_LEVEL=0`.
Readrandom results before PR:
```
readrandom : 4.544 micros/op 220090 ops/sec; 16.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
Readrandom results after PR:
```
readrandom : 11.147 micros/op 89707 ops/sec; 6.9 MB/s (63103 of 100000 found)
```
So it's actually slower right now, but this PR paves the way for future optimizations (see #4493).
----
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/4449
Differential Revision: D10370575
Pulled By: abhimadan
fbshipit-source-id: 9a2e152be1ef36969055c0e9eb4beb0d96c11f4d
6 years ago
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
} // namespace rocksdb
|