Summary:
Changed compaction_job_test to support better/more thorough
tests and added two tests. Also changed MockFileContents
to order using InternalKeyComparator.
Test Plan: make compaction_job_test && ./compaction_job_test; make all && make check
Reviewers: sdong, rven, igor, yhchiang, anthony
Reviewed By: anthony
Subscribers: dhruba, leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D42837
Summary: It's not really nice to call user's API with garbage data in new_value. This diff makes sure that new_value is empty before calling the merge operator.
Test Plan: Added assert to Merge operator in merge_test
Reviewers: sdong, yhchiang
Reviewed By: yhchiang
Subscribers: dhruba, leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D40773
Summary:
* PartialMerge api now takes a list of operands instead of two operands.
* Add min_pertial_merge_operands to Options, indicating the minimum
number of operands to trigger partial merge.
* This diff is based on Schalk's previous diff (D14601), but it also
includes necessary changes such as updating the pure C api for
partial merge.
Test Plan:
* make check all
* develop tests for cases where partial merge takes more than two
operands.
TODOs (from Schalk):
* Add test with min_partial_merge_operands > 2.
* Perform benchmarks to measure the performance improvements (can probably
use results of task #2837810.)
* Add description of problem to doc/index.html.
* Change wiki pages to reflect the interface changes.
Reviewers: haobo, igor, vamsi
Reviewed By: haobo
CC: leveldb, dhruba
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D16815
Summary: In get operations, merge_operands is only used in few cases. Lazily initialize it can reduce average latency in some cases
Test Plan: make all check
Reviewers: haobo, kailiu, dhruba
Reviewed By: haobo
CC: igor, nkg-, leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14415
Conflicts:
db/db_impl.cc
db/memtable.cc
Summary: In get operations, merge_operands is only used in few cases. Lazily initialize it can reduce average latency in some cases
Test Plan: make all check
Reviewers: haobo, kailiu, dhruba
Reviewed By: haobo
CC: igor, nkg-, leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D14415
Summary:
The previous release 2.4 had a mapping to alias the older
namespace to rocksdb. This mapping is not needed in the new
release.
Test Plan:
make check
make release
Reviewers: emayanke
Reviewed By: emayanke
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D13359
Summary:
Change namespace from leveldb to rocksdb. This allows a single
application to link in open-source leveldb code as well as
rocksdb code into the same process.
Test Plan: compile rocksdb
Reviewers: emayanke
Reviewed By: emayanke
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D13287
Summary: Replace include/leveldb with include/rocksdb.
Test Plan:
make clean; make check
make clean; make release
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D12489
Summary:
-Added null checks and revisions to DBIter::MergeValuesNewToOld()
-Added DBIter test to stringappend_test
-Major fix with Merge and TTL
More plans for fixes later.
Test Plan:
-make clean; make stringappend_test -j 32; ./stringappend_test
-make all check;
Reviewers: haobo, emayanke, vamsi, dhruba
Reviewed By: haobo
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D12315
Summary:
Here are the major changes to the Merge Interface. It has been expanded
to handle cases where the MergeOperator is not associative. It does so by stacking
up merge operations while scanning through the key history (i.e.: during Get() or
Compaction), until a valid Put/Delete/end-of-history is encountered; it then
applies all of the merge operations in the correct sequence starting with the
base/sentinel value.
I have also introduced an "AssociativeMerge" function which allows the user to
take advantage of associative merge operations (such as in the case of counters).
The implementation will always attempt to merge the operations/operands themselves
together when they are encountered, and will resort to the "stacking" method if
and only if the "associative-merge" fails.
This implementation is conjectured to allow MergeOperator to handle the general
case, while still providing the user with the ability to take advantage of certain
efficiencies in their own merge-operator / data-structure.
NOTE: This is a preliminary diff. This must still go through a lot of review,
revision, and testing. Feedback welcome!
Test Plan:
-This is a preliminary diff. I have only just begun testing/debugging it.
-I will be testing this with the existing MergeOperator use-cases and unit-tests
(counters, string-append, and redis-lists)
-I will be "desk-checking" and walking through the code with the help gdb.
-I will find a way of stress-testing the new interface / implementation using
db_bench, db_test, merge_test, and/or db_stress.
-I will ensure that my tests cover all cases: Get-Memtable,
Get-Immutable-Memtable, Get-from-Disk, Iterator-Range-Scan, Flush-Memtable-to-L0,
Compaction-L0-L1, Compaction-Ln-L(n+1), Put/Delete found, Put/Delete not-found,
end-of-history, end-of-file, etc.
-A lot of feedback from the reviewers.
Reviewers: haobo, dhruba, zshao, emayanke
Reviewed By: haobo
CC: leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D11499
Summary:
This diff introduces a new Merge operation into rocksdb.
The purpose of this review is mostly getting feedback from the team (everyone please) on the design.
Please focus on the four files under include/leveldb/, as they spell the client visible interface change.
include/leveldb/db.h
include/leveldb/merge_operator.h
include/leveldb/options.h
include/leveldb/write_batch.h
Please go over local/my_test.cc carefully, as it is a concerete use case.
Please also review the impelmentation files to see if the straw man implementation makes sense.
Note that, the diff does pass all make check and truly supports forward iterator over db and a version
of Get that's based on iterator.
Future work:
- Integration with compaction
- A raw Get implementation
I am working on a wiki that explains the design and implementation choices, but coding comes
just naturally and I think it might be a good idea to share the code earlier. The code is
heavily commented.
Test Plan: run all local tests
Reviewers: dhruba, heyongqiang
Reviewed By: dhruba
CC: leveldb, zshao, sheki, emayanke, MarkCallaghan
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D9651
Islam AbdelRahman