Tag:
Branch:
Tree:
main
main
oxigraph-8.1.1
oxigraph-8.3.2
oxigraph-main
${ noResults }
3 Commits (main)
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
Hui Xiao
|
98d5db5c2e |
Sort L0 files by newly introduced epoch_num (#10922)
Summary:
**Context:**
Sorting L0 files by `largest_seqno` has at least two inconvenience:
- File ingestion and compaction involving ingested files can create files of overlapping seqno range with the existing files. `force_consistency_check=true` will catch such overlap seqno range even those harmless overlap.
- For example, consider the following sequence of events ("key@n" indicates key at seqno "n")
- insert k1@1 to memtable m1
- ingest file s1 with k2@2, ingest file s2 with k3@3
- insert k4@4 to m1
- compact files s1, s2 and result in new file s3 of seqno range [2, 3]
- flush m1 and result in new file s4 of seqno range [1, 4]. And `force_consistency_check=true` will think s4 and s3 has file reordering corruption that might cause retuning an old value of k1
- However such caught corruption is a false positive since s1, s2 will not have overlapped keys with k1 or whatever inserted into m1 before ingest file s1 by the requirement of file ingestion (otherwise the m1 will be flushed first before any of the file ingestion completes). Therefore there in fact isn't any file reordering corruption.
- Single delete can decrease a file's largest seqno and ordering by `largest_seqno` can introduce a wrong ordering hence file reordering corruption
- For example, consider the following sequence of events ("key@n" indicates key at seqno "n", Credit to ajkr for this example)
- an existing SST s1 contains only k1@1
- insert k1@2 to memtable m1
- ingest file s2 with k3@3, ingest file s3 with k4@4
- insert single delete k5@5 in m1
- flush m1 and result in new file s4 of seqno range [2, 5]
- compact s1, s2, s3 and result in new file s5 of seqno range [1, 4]
- compact s4 and result in new file s6 of seqno range [2] due to single delete
- By the last step, we have file ordering by largest seqno (">" means "newer") : s5 > s6 while s6 contains a newer version of the k1's value (i.e, k1@2) than s5, which is a real reordering corruption. While this can be caught by `force_consistency_check=true`, there isn't a good way to prevent this from happening if ordering by `largest_seqno`
Therefore, we are redesigning the sorting criteria of L0 files and avoid above inconvenience. Credit to ajkr , we now introduce `epoch_num` which describes the order of a file being flushed or ingested/imported (compaction output file will has the minimum `epoch_num` among input files'). This will avoid the above inconvenience in the following ways:
- In the first case above, there will no longer be overlap seqno range check in `force_consistency_check=true` but `epoch_number` ordering check. This will result in file ordering s1 < s2 < s4 (pre-compaction) and s3 < s4 (post-compaction) which won't trigger false positive corruption. See test class `DBCompactionTestL0FilesMisorderCorruption*` for more.
- In the second case above, this will result in file ordering s1 < s2 < s3 < s4 (pre-compacting s1, s2, s3), s5 < s4 (post-compacting s1, s2, s3), s5 < s6 (post-compacting s4), which are correct file ordering without causing any corruption.
**Summary:**
- Introduce `epoch_number` stored per `ColumnFamilyData` and sort CF's L0 files by their assigned `epoch_number` instead of `largest_seqno`.
- `epoch_number` is increased and assigned upon `VersionEdit::AddFile()` for flush (or similarly for WriteLevel0TableForRecovery) and file ingestion (except for allow_behind_true, which will always get assigned as the `kReservedEpochNumberForFileIngestedBehind`)
- Compaction output file is assigned with the minimum `epoch_number` among input files'
- Refit level: reuse refitted file's epoch_number
- Other paths needing `epoch_number` treatment:
- Import column families: reuse file's epoch_number if exists. If not, assign one based on `NewestFirstBySeqNo`
- Repair: reuse file's epoch_number if exists. If not, assign one based on `NewestFirstBySeqNo`.
- Assigning new epoch_number to a file and adding this file to LSM tree should be atomic. This is guaranteed by us assigning epoch_number right upon `VersionEdit::AddFile()` where this version edit will be apply to LSM tree shape right after by holding the db mutex (e.g, flush, file ingestion, import column family) or by there is only 1 ongoing edit per CF (e.g, WriteLevel0TableForRecovery, Repair).
- Assigning the minimum input epoch number to compaction output file won't misorder L0 files (even through later `Refit(target_level=0)`). It's due to for every key "k" in the input range, a legit compaction will cover a continuous epoch number range of that key. As long as we assign the key "k" the minimum input epoch number, it won't become newer or older than the versions of this key that aren't included in this compaction hence no misorder.
- Persist `epoch_number` of each file in manifest and recover `epoch_number` on db recovery
- Backward compatibility with old db without `epoch_number` support is guaranteed by assigning `epoch_number` to recovered files by `NewestFirstBySeqno` order. See `VersionStorageInfo::RecoverEpochNumbers()` for more
- Forward compatibility with manifest is guaranteed by flexibility of `NewFileCustomTag`
- Replace `force_consistent_check` on L0 with `epoch_number` and remove false positive check like case 1 with `largest_seqno` above
- Due to backward compatibility issue, we might encounter files with missing epoch number at the beginning of db recovery. We will still use old L0 sorting mechanism (`NewestFirstBySeqno`) to check/sort them till we infer their epoch number. See usages of `EpochNumberRequirement`.
- Remove fix https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/5958#issue-511150930 and their outdated tests to file reordering corruption because such fix can be replaced by this PR.
- Misc:
- update existing tests with `epoch_number` so make check will pass
- update https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/5958#issue-511150930 tests to verify corruption is fixed using `epoch_number` and cover universal/fifo compaction/CompactRange/CompactFile cases
- assert db_mutex is held for a few places before calling ColumnFamilyData::NewEpochNumber()
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/10922
Test Plan:
- `make check`
- New unit tests under `db/db_compaction_test.cc`, `db/db_test2.cc`, `db/version_builder_test.cc`, `db/repair_test.cc`
- Updated tests (i.e, `DBCompactionTestL0FilesMisorderCorruption*`) under https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/5958#issue-511150930
- [Ongoing] Compatibility test: manually run
|
2 years ago |
|
sdong
|
252bea405e |
Improve SubCompaction Partitioning (#10393)
Summary: Unit tests still haven't been fixed. Also need to add more tests. But I ran some simple fillrandom db_bench and the partitioning feels reasonable. Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/10393 Test Plan: 1. Make sure existing tests pass. This should cover some basic sub compaction logic to be correct and the partitioning result is reasonable; 2. Add a new unit test to ApproximateKeyAnchors() 3. Run some db_bench with max_subcompaction = 4 and watch the compaction is indeed partitioned evenly. Reviewed By: jay-zhuang Differential Revision: D38043783 fbshipit-source-id: 085008e0f85f9b7c5abff7800307618320efb19f |
2 years ago |
|
Jay Zhuang
|
6ce0b2ca34 |
Tiered Compaction: per key placement support (#9964)
Summary: Support per_key_placement for last level compaction, which will be used for tiered compaction. * compaction iterator reports which level a key should output to; * compaction get the output level information and check if it's safe to output the data to penultimate level; * all compaction output files will be installed. * extra internal compaction stats added for penultimate level. Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/9964 Test Plan: * Unittest * db_bench, no significate difference: https://gist.github.com/jay-zhuang/3645f8fb97ec0ab47c10704bb39fd6e4 * microbench manual compaction no significate difference: https://gist.github.com/jay-zhuang/ba679b3e89e24992615ee9eef310e6dd * run the db_stress multiple times (not covering the new feature) looks good (internal: https://fburl.com/sandcastle/9w84pp2m) Reviewed By: ajkr Differential Revision: D36249494 Pulled By: jay-zhuang fbshipit-source-id: a96da57c8031c1df83e4a7a8567b657a112b80a3 |
2 years ago |