Summary: Make RocksDb build and run on Windows to be functionally
complete and performant. All existing test cases run with no
regressions. Performance numbers are in the pull-request.
Test plan: make all of the existing unit tests pass, obtain perf numbers.
Co-authored-by: Praveen Rao praveensinghrao@outlook.com
Co-authored-by: Sherlock Huang baihan.huang@gmail.com
Co-authored-by: Alex Zinoviev alexander.zinoviev@me.com
Co-authored-by: Dmitri Smirnov dmitrism@microsoft.com
Summary:
Apply InfoLogLevel to the logs and add missing copy-right information
to utilities/merge_operators/uint64add.cc.
Test Plan: make
Reviewers: ljin, sdong, igor
Reviewed By: igor
Subscribers: dhruba, leveldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D27897
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:
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
Dmitri Smirnov