You can not select more than 25 topics Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.
rocksdb/table/block_based/block_based_table_iterator.h

213 lines
7.6 KiB

// Copyright (c) 2011-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).
//
// Copyright (c) 2011 The LevelDB Authors. All rights reserved.
// Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be
// found in the LICENSE file. See the AUTHORS file for names of contributors.
#pragma once
#include "table/block_based/block_based_table_reader.h"
#include "table/block_based/block_based_table_reader_impl.h"
De-template block based table iterator (#6531) Summary: Right now block based table iterator is used as both of iterating data for block based table, and for the index iterator for partitioend index. This was initially convenient for introducing a new iterator and block type for new index format, while reducing code change. However, these two usage doesn't go with each other very well. For example, Prev() is never called for partitioned index iterator, and some other complexity is maintained in block based iterators, which is not needed for index iterator but maintainers will always need to reason about it. Furthermore, the template usage is not following Google C++ Style which we are following, and makes a large chunk of code tangled together. This commit separate the two iterators. Right now, here is what it is done: 1. Copy the block based iterator code into partitioned index iterator, and de-template them. 2. Remove some code not needed for partitioned index. The upper bound check and tricks are removed. We never tested performance for those tricks when partitioned index is enabled in the first place. It's unlikelyl to generate performance regression, as creating new partitioned index block is much rarer than data blocks. 3. Separate out the prefetch logic to a helper class and both classes call them. This commit will enable future follow-ups. One direction is that we might separate index iterator interface for data blocks and index blocks, as they are quite different. Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/6531 Test Plan: build using make and cmake. And build release Differential Revision: D20473108 fbshipit-source-id: e48011783b339a4257c204cc07507b171b834b0f
5 years ago
#include "table/block_based/block_prefetcher.h"
#include "table/block_based/reader_common.h"
namespace ROCKSDB_NAMESPACE {
// Iterates over the contents of BlockBasedTable.
De-template block based table iterator (#6531) Summary: Right now block based table iterator is used as both of iterating data for block based table, and for the index iterator for partitioend index. This was initially convenient for introducing a new iterator and block type for new index format, while reducing code change. However, these two usage doesn't go with each other very well. For example, Prev() is never called for partitioned index iterator, and some other complexity is maintained in block based iterators, which is not needed for index iterator but maintainers will always need to reason about it. Furthermore, the template usage is not following Google C++ Style which we are following, and makes a large chunk of code tangled together. This commit separate the two iterators. Right now, here is what it is done: 1. Copy the block based iterator code into partitioned index iterator, and de-template them. 2. Remove some code not needed for partitioned index. The upper bound check and tricks are removed. We never tested performance for those tricks when partitioned index is enabled in the first place. It's unlikelyl to generate performance regression, as creating new partitioned index block is much rarer than data blocks. 3. Separate out the prefetch logic to a helper class and both classes call them. This commit will enable future follow-ups. One direction is that we might separate index iterator interface for data blocks and index blocks, as they are quite different. Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/6531 Test Plan: build using make and cmake. And build release Differential Revision: D20473108 fbshipit-source-id: e48011783b339a4257c204cc07507b171b834b0f
5 years ago
class BlockBasedTableIterator : public InternalIteratorBase<Slice> {
// compaction_readahead_size: its value will only be used if for_compaction =
// true
public:
De-template block based table iterator (#6531) Summary: Right now block based table iterator is used as both of iterating data for block based table, and for the index iterator for partitioend index. This was initially convenient for introducing a new iterator and block type for new index format, while reducing code change. However, these two usage doesn't go with each other very well. For example, Prev() is never called for partitioned index iterator, and some other complexity is maintained in block based iterators, which is not needed for index iterator but maintainers will always need to reason about it. Furthermore, the template usage is not following Google C++ Style which we are following, and makes a large chunk of code tangled together. This commit separate the two iterators. Right now, here is what it is done: 1. Copy the block based iterator code into partitioned index iterator, and de-template them. 2. Remove some code not needed for partitioned index. The upper bound check and tricks are removed. We never tested performance for those tricks when partitioned index is enabled in the first place. It's unlikelyl to generate performance regression, as creating new partitioned index block is much rarer than data blocks. 3. Separate out the prefetch logic to a helper class and both classes call them. This commit will enable future follow-ups. One direction is that we might separate index iterator interface for data blocks and index blocks, as they are quite different. Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/6531 Test Plan: build using make and cmake. And build release Differential Revision: D20473108 fbshipit-source-id: e48011783b339a4257c204cc07507b171b834b0f
5 years ago
BlockBasedTableIterator(
const BlockBasedTable* table, const ReadOptions& read_options,
const InternalKeyComparator& icomp,
std::unique_ptr<InternalIteratorBase<IndexValue>>&& index_iter,
bool check_filter, bool need_upper_bound_check,
const SliceTransform* prefix_extractor, TableReaderCaller caller,
size_t compaction_readahead_size = 0)
: table_(table),
read_options_(read_options),
icomp_(icomp),
user_comparator_(icomp.user_comparator()),
De-template block based table iterator (#6531) Summary: Right now block based table iterator is used as both of iterating data for block based table, and for the index iterator for partitioend index. This was initially convenient for introducing a new iterator and block type for new index format, while reducing code change. However, these two usage doesn't go with each other very well. For example, Prev() is never called for partitioned index iterator, and some other complexity is maintained in block based iterators, which is not needed for index iterator but maintainers will always need to reason about it. Furthermore, the template usage is not following Google C++ Style which we are following, and makes a large chunk of code tangled together. This commit separate the two iterators. Right now, here is what it is done: 1. Copy the block based iterator code into partitioned index iterator, and de-template them. 2. Remove some code not needed for partitioned index. The upper bound check and tricks are removed. We never tested performance for those tricks when partitioned index is enabled in the first place. It's unlikelyl to generate performance regression, as creating new partitioned index block is much rarer than data blocks. 3. Separate out the prefetch logic to a helper class and both classes call them. This commit will enable future follow-ups. One direction is that we might separate index iterator interface for data blocks and index blocks, as they are quite different. Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/6531 Test Plan: build using make and cmake. And build release Differential Revision: D20473108 fbshipit-source-id: e48011783b339a4257c204cc07507b171b834b0f
5 years ago
index_iter_(std::move(index_iter)),
pinned_iters_mgr_(nullptr),
block_iter_points_to_real_block_(false),
check_filter_(check_filter),
need_upper_bound_check_(need_upper_bound_check),
prefix_extractor_(prefix_extractor),
lookup_context_(caller),
De-template block based table iterator (#6531) Summary: Right now block based table iterator is used as both of iterating data for block based table, and for the index iterator for partitioend index. This was initially convenient for introducing a new iterator and block type for new index format, while reducing code change. However, these two usage doesn't go with each other very well. For example, Prev() is never called for partitioned index iterator, and some other complexity is maintained in block based iterators, which is not needed for index iterator but maintainers will always need to reason about it. Furthermore, the template usage is not following Google C++ Style which we are following, and makes a large chunk of code tangled together. This commit separate the two iterators. Right now, here is what it is done: 1. Copy the block based iterator code into partitioned index iterator, and de-template them. 2. Remove some code not needed for partitioned index. The upper bound check and tricks are removed. We never tested performance for those tricks when partitioned index is enabled in the first place. It's unlikelyl to generate performance regression, as creating new partitioned index block is much rarer than data blocks. 3. Separate out the prefetch logic to a helper class and both classes call them. This commit will enable future follow-ups. One direction is that we might separate index iterator interface for data blocks and index blocks, as they are quite different. Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/6531 Test Plan: build using make and cmake. And build release Differential Revision: D20473108 fbshipit-source-id: e48011783b339a4257c204cc07507b171b834b0f
5 years ago
block_prefetcher_(compaction_readahead_size) {}
De-template block based table iterator (#6531) Summary: Right now block based table iterator is used as both of iterating data for block based table, and for the index iterator for partitioend index. This was initially convenient for introducing a new iterator and block type for new index format, while reducing code change. However, these two usage doesn't go with each other very well. For example, Prev() is never called for partitioned index iterator, and some other complexity is maintained in block based iterators, which is not needed for index iterator but maintainers will always need to reason about it. Furthermore, the template usage is not following Google C++ Style which we are following, and makes a large chunk of code tangled together. This commit separate the two iterators. Right now, here is what it is done: 1. Copy the block based iterator code into partitioned index iterator, and de-template them. 2. Remove some code not needed for partitioned index. The upper bound check and tricks are removed. We never tested performance for those tricks when partitioned index is enabled in the first place. It's unlikelyl to generate performance regression, as creating new partitioned index block is much rarer than data blocks. 3. Separate out the prefetch logic to a helper class and both classes call them. This commit will enable future follow-ups. One direction is that we might separate index iterator interface for data blocks and index blocks, as they are quite different. Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/6531 Test Plan: build using make and cmake. And build release Differential Revision: D20473108 fbshipit-source-id: e48011783b339a4257c204cc07507b171b834b0f
5 years ago
~BlockBasedTableIterator() {}
void Seek(const Slice& target) override;
void SeekForPrev(const Slice& target) override;
void SeekToFirst() override;
void SeekToLast() override;
void Next() final override;
bool NextAndGetResult(IterateResult* result) override;
void Prev() override;
bool Valid() const override {
return !is_out_of_bound_ &&
(is_at_first_key_from_index_ ||
(block_iter_points_to_real_block_ && block_iter_.Valid()));
}
Slice key() const override {
assert(Valid());
if (is_at_first_key_from_index_) {
return index_iter_->value().first_internal_key;
} else {
return block_iter_.key();
}
}
Slice user_key() const override {
assert(Valid());
if (is_at_first_key_from_index_) {
return ExtractUserKey(index_iter_->value().first_internal_key);
} else {
return block_iter_.user_key();
}
}
De-template block based table iterator (#6531) Summary: Right now block based table iterator is used as both of iterating data for block based table, and for the index iterator for partitioend index. This was initially convenient for introducing a new iterator and block type for new index format, while reducing code change. However, these two usage doesn't go with each other very well. For example, Prev() is never called for partitioned index iterator, and some other complexity is maintained in block based iterators, which is not needed for index iterator but maintainers will always need to reason about it. Furthermore, the template usage is not following Google C++ Style which we are following, and makes a large chunk of code tangled together. This commit separate the two iterators. Right now, here is what it is done: 1. Copy the block based iterator code into partitioned index iterator, and de-template them. 2. Remove some code not needed for partitioned index. The upper bound check and tricks are removed. We never tested performance for those tricks when partitioned index is enabled in the first place. It's unlikelyl to generate performance regression, as creating new partitioned index block is much rarer than data blocks. 3. Separate out the prefetch logic to a helper class and both classes call them. This commit will enable future follow-ups. One direction is that we might separate index iterator interface for data blocks and index blocks, as they are quite different. Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/6531 Test Plan: build using make and cmake. And build release Differential Revision: D20473108 fbshipit-source-id: e48011783b339a4257c204cc07507b171b834b0f
5 years ago
Slice value() const override {
assert(Valid());
// Load current block if not loaded.
if (is_at_first_key_from_index_ &&
!const_cast<BlockBasedTableIterator*>(this)
->MaterializeCurrentBlock()) {
// Oops, index is not consistent with block contents, but we have
// no good way to report error at this point. Let's return empty value.
De-template block based table iterator (#6531) Summary: Right now block based table iterator is used as both of iterating data for block based table, and for the index iterator for partitioend index. This was initially convenient for introducing a new iterator and block type for new index format, while reducing code change. However, these two usage doesn't go with each other very well. For example, Prev() is never called for partitioned index iterator, and some other complexity is maintained in block based iterators, which is not needed for index iterator but maintainers will always need to reason about it. Furthermore, the template usage is not following Google C++ Style which we are following, and makes a large chunk of code tangled together. This commit separate the two iterators. Right now, here is what it is done: 1. Copy the block based iterator code into partitioned index iterator, and de-template them. 2. Remove some code not needed for partitioned index. The upper bound check and tricks are removed. We never tested performance for those tricks when partitioned index is enabled in the first place. It's unlikelyl to generate performance regression, as creating new partitioned index block is much rarer than data blocks. 3. Separate out the prefetch logic to a helper class and both classes call them. This commit will enable future follow-ups. One direction is that we might separate index iterator interface for data blocks and index blocks, as they are quite different. Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/6531 Test Plan: build using make and cmake. And build release Differential Revision: D20473108 fbshipit-source-id: e48011783b339a4257c204cc07507b171b834b0f
5 years ago
return Slice();
}
return block_iter_.value();
}
Status status() const override {
// Prefix index set status to NotFound when the prefix does not exist
if (!index_iter_->status().ok() && !index_iter_->status().IsNotFound()) {
return index_iter_->status();
} else if (block_iter_points_to_real_block_) {
return block_iter_.status();
} else {
return Status::OK();
}
}
// Whether iterator invalidated for being out of bound.
bool IsOutOfBound() override { return is_out_of_bound_; }
inline bool MayBeOutOfUpperBound() override {
assert(Valid());
return !data_block_within_upper_bound_;
}
void SetPinnedItersMgr(PinnedIteratorsManager* pinned_iters_mgr) override {
pinned_iters_mgr_ = pinned_iters_mgr;
}
bool IsKeyPinned() const override {
// Our key comes either from block_iter_'s current key
// or index_iter_'s current *value*.
return pinned_iters_mgr_ && pinned_iters_mgr_->PinningEnabled() &&
((is_at_first_key_from_index_ && index_iter_->IsValuePinned()) ||
(block_iter_points_to_real_block_ && block_iter_.IsKeyPinned()));
}
bool IsValuePinned() const override {
// Load current block if not loaded.
if (is_at_first_key_from_index_) {
const_cast<BlockBasedTableIterator*>(this)->MaterializeCurrentBlock();
}
// BlockIter::IsValuePinned() is always true. No need to check
return pinned_iters_mgr_ && pinned_iters_mgr_->PinningEnabled() &&
block_iter_points_to_real_block_;
}
void ResetDataIter() {
if (block_iter_points_to_real_block_) {
if (pinned_iters_mgr_ != nullptr && pinned_iters_mgr_->PinningEnabled()) {
block_iter_.DelegateCleanupsTo(pinned_iters_mgr_);
}
block_iter_.Invalidate(Status::OK());
block_iter_points_to_real_block_ = false;
}
}
void SavePrevIndexValue() {
if (block_iter_points_to_real_block_) {
// Reseek. If they end up with the same data block, we shouldn't re-fetch
// the same data block.
prev_block_offset_ = index_iter_->value().handle.offset();
}
}
private:
enum class IterDirection {
kForward,
kBackward,
};
const BlockBasedTable* table_;
const ReadOptions read_options_;
const InternalKeyComparator& icomp_;
UserComparatorWrapper user_comparator_;
De-template block based table iterator (#6531) Summary: Right now block based table iterator is used as both of iterating data for block based table, and for the index iterator for partitioend index. This was initially convenient for introducing a new iterator and block type for new index format, while reducing code change. However, these two usage doesn't go with each other very well. For example, Prev() is never called for partitioned index iterator, and some other complexity is maintained in block based iterators, which is not needed for index iterator but maintainers will always need to reason about it. Furthermore, the template usage is not following Google C++ Style which we are following, and makes a large chunk of code tangled together. This commit separate the two iterators. Right now, here is what it is done: 1. Copy the block based iterator code into partitioned index iterator, and de-template them. 2. Remove some code not needed for partitioned index. The upper bound check and tricks are removed. We never tested performance for those tricks when partitioned index is enabled in the first place. It's unlikelyl to generate performance regression, as creating new partitioned index block is much rarer than data blocks. 3. Separate out the prefetch logic to a helper class and both classes call them. This commit will enable future follow-ups. One direction is that we might separate index iterator interface for data blocks and index blocks, as they are quite different. Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/6531 Test Plan: build using make and cmake. And build release Differential Revision: D20473108 fbshipit-source-id: e48011783b339a4257c204cc07507b171b834b0f
5 years ago
std::unique_ptr<InternalIteratorBase<IndexValue>> index_iter_;
PinnedIteratorsManager* pinned_iters_mgr_;
De-template block based table iterator (#6531) Summary: Right now block based table iterator is used as both of iterating data for block based table, and for the index iterator for partitioend index. This was initially convenient for introducing a new iterator and block type for new index format, while reducing code change. However, these two usage doesn't go with each other very well. For example, Prev() is never called for partitioned index iterator, and some other complexity is maintained in block based iterators, which is not needed for index iterator but maintainers will always need to reason about it. Furthermore, the template usage is not following Google C++ Style which we are following, and makes a large chunk of code tangled together. This commit separate the two iterators. Right now, here is what it is done: 1. Copy the block based iterator code into partitioned index iterator, and de-template them. 2. Remove some code not needed for partitioned index. The upper bound check and tricks are removed. We never tested performance for those tricks when partitioned index is enabled in the first place. It's unlikelyl to generate performance regression, as creating new partitioned index block is much rarer than data blocks. 3. Separate out the prefetch logic to a helper class and both classes call them. This commit will enable future follow-ups. One direction is that we might separate index iterator interface for data blocks and index blocks, as they are quite different. Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/6531 Test Plan: build using make and cmake. And build release Differential Revision: D20473108 fbshipit-source-id: e48011783b339a4257c204cc07507b171b834b0f
5 years ago
DataBlockIter block_iter_;
// True if block_iter_ is initialized and points to the same block
// as index iterator.
bool block_iter_points_to_real_block_;
// See InternalIteratorBase::IsOutOfBound().
bool is_out_of_bound_ = false;
// Whether current data block being fully within iterate upper bound.
bool data_block_within_upper_bound_ = false;
// True if we're standing at the first key of a block, and we haven't loaded
// that block yet. A call to value() will trigger loading the block.
bool is_at_first_key_from_index_ = false;
bool check_filter_;
// TODO(Zhongyi): pick a better name
bool need_upper_bound_check_;
const SliceTransform* prefix_extractor_;
uint64_t prev_block_offset_ = std::numeric_limits<uint64_t>::max();
BlockCacheLookupContext lookup_context_;
De-template block based table iterator (#6531) Summary: Right now block based table iterator is used as both of iterating data for block based table, and for the index iterator for partitioend index. This was initially convenient for introducing a new iterator and block type for new index format, while reducing code change. However, these two usage doesn't go with each other very well. For example, Prev() is never called for partitioned index iterator, and some other complexity is maintained in block based iterators, which is not needed for index iterator but maintainers will always need to reason about it. Furthermore, the template usage is not following Google C++ Style which we are following, and makes a large chunk of code tangled together. This commit separate the two iterators. Right now, here is what it is done: 1. Copy the block based iterator code into partitioned index iterator, and de-template them. 2. Remove some code not needed for partitioned index. The upper bound check and tricks are removed. We never tested performance for those tricks when partitioned index is enabled in the first place. It's unlikelyl to generate performance regression, as creating new partitioned index block is much rarer than data blocks. 3. Separate out the prefetch logic to a helper class and both classes call them. This commit will enable future follow-ups. One direction is that we might separate index iterator interface for data blocks and index blocks, as they are quite different. Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/6531 Test Plan: build using make and cmake. And build release Differential Revision: D20473108 fbshipit-source-id: e48011783b339a4257c204cc07507b171b834b0f
5 years ago
BlockPrefetcher block_prefetcher_;
// If `target` is null, seek to first.
void SeekImpl(const Slice* target);
void InitDataBlock();
bool MaterializeCurrentBlock();
void FindKeyForward();
void FindBlockForward();
void FindKeyBackward();
void CheckOutOfBound();
// Check if data block is fully within iterate_upper_bound.
//
// Note MyRocks may update iterate bounds between seek. To workaround it,
// we need to check and update data_block_within_upper_bound_ accordingly.
void CheckDataBlockWithinUpperBound();
bool CheckPrefixMayMatch(const Slice& ikey, IterDirection direction) {
if (need_upper_bound_check_ && direction == IterDirection::kBackward) {
// Upper bound check isn't sufficnet for backward direction to
// guarantee the same result as total order, so disable prefix
// check.
return true;
}
if (check_filter_ &&
!table_->PrefixMayMatch(ikey, read_options_, prefix_extractor_,
need_upper_bound_check_, &lookup_context_)) {
// TODO remember the iterator is invalidated because of prefix
// match. This can avoid the upper level file iterator to falsely
// believe the position is the end of the SST file and move to
// the first key of the next file.
ResetDataIter();
return false;
}
return true;
}
};
} // namespace ROCKSDB_NAMESPACE