Summary:
Problem: Option string accepts only cache_size as parameter for block_cache which is specified as "block_cache=1M".
It doesn't accept other parameters like num_shards etc.
Changes :
1) ParseBlockBasedTableOption in block_based_table_factory is edited to accept cache options in the format "block_cache=<cache_size>:<num_shard_bits>:<strict_capacity_limit>:<high_pri_pool_ratio>".
Options other than cache_size are optional to maintain backward compatibility. The changes are valid for block_cache_compressed as well.
For example, "block_cache=1M:6:true:0.5", "block_cache=1M:6:true", "block_cache=1M:6" and "block_cache=1M" are all valid option strings.
2) Corresponding unit tests are added.
Closes https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/3108
Differential Revision: D6420997
Pulled By: sagar0
fbshipit-source-id: cdea8b785688d2802907974af27225ccc1c0cd43
Summary:
This patch enables using PinnableSlice for RowCache, changes include
not releasing the cache handle immediately after lookup in TableCache::Get, instead pass a Cleanble function which does Cache::RleaseHandle.
Closes https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/2492
Differential Revision: D5316216
Pulled By: maysamyabandeh
fbshipit-source-id: d2a684bd7e4ba73772f762e58a82b5f4fbd5d362
Summary:
This is useful when we put the entries in the block cache for accounting
purposes and do not expect it to be used after it is released. If the cache does not
erase the item in such cases not only the performance of cache is
negatively affected but the item's destructor not being called at the
time of release might violate the assumptions about the lifetime of the
object.
The new change adds a force_erase option to the Release method and
returns a boolean to indicate whehter the item is successfully deleted.
Closes https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/2180
Differential Revision: D4916032
Pulled By: maysamyabandeh
fbshipit-source-id: 94409a346069923cac9de8e57adc313b4ed46f28
Summary:
Move some files under util/ to new directories env/, monitoring/ options/ and cache/
Closes https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/2090
Differential Revision: D4833681
Pulled By: siying
fbshipit-source-id: 2fd8bef
Summary:
Previously the only way to increment a handle's refcount was to invoke Lookup(), which (1) did hash table lookup to get cache handle, (2) incremented that handle's refcount. For a future DeleteRange optimization, I added a function, Ref(), for when the caller already has a cache handle and only needs to do (2).
Closes https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/1761
Differential Revision: D4397114
Pulled By: ajkr
fbshipit-source-id: 9addbe5
Summary:
Improve cache options logging to info log.
Also print the value of
cache_index_and_filter_blocks_with_high_priority.
Closes https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/1709
Differential Revision: D4358776
Pulled By: yiwu-arbug
fbshipit-source-id: 8f030a0
Summary:
Add option to block based table to insert index/filter blocks to block cache with priority. Combined with LRUCache with high_pri_pool_ratio, we can reserved space for index/filter blocks, make them less likely to be evicted.
Depends on D61977.
Test Plan: See unit test.
Reviewers: lightmark, IslamAbdelRahman, sdong
Reviewed By: sdong
Subscribers: andrewkr, dhruba, march, leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D62241
Summary:
Add mid-point insertion functionality to LRU cache. Caller of `Cache::Insert()` can set an additional parameter to make a cache entry have higher priority. The LRU cache will reserve at most `capacity * high_pri_pool_pct` bytes for high-pri cache entries. If `high_pri_pool_pct` is zero, the cache degenerates to normal LRU cache.
Context: If we are to put index and filter blocks into RocksDB block cache, index/filter block can be swap out too early. We want to add an option to RocksDB to reserve some capacity in block cache just for index/filter blocks, to mitigate the issue.
In later diffs I'll update block based table reader to use the interface to cache index/filter blocks at high priority, and expose the option to `DBOptions` and make it dynamic changeable.
Test Plan: unit test.
Reviewers: IslamAbdelRahman, sdong, lightmark
Reviewed By: lightmark
Subscribers: andrewkr, dhruba, march, leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D61977
Summary: ... so that I can include the header and create LRUCache specific tests for D61977
Test Plan:
make check
Reviewers: lightmark, IslamAbdelRahman, sdong
Reviewed By: sdong
Subscribers: andrewkr, dhruba, leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D62145
Phani Shekhar Mantripragada