Summary:
add option `block_protection_bytes_per_key` and implementation for block per key-value checksum. The main changes are
1. checksum construction and verification in block.cc/h
2. pass the option `block_protection_bytes_per_key` around (mainly for methods defined in table_cache.h)
3. unit tests/crash test updates
Tests:
* Added unit tests
* Crash test: `python3 tools/db_crashtest.py blackbox --simple --block_protection_bytes_per_key=1 --write_buffer_size=1048576`
Follow up (maybe as a separate PR): make sure corruption status returned from BlockIters are correctly handled.
Performance:
Turning on block per KV protection has a non-trivial negative impact on read performance and costs additional memory.
For memory, each block includes additional 24 bytes for checksum-related states beside checksum itself. For CPU, I set up a DB of size ~1.2GB with 5M keys (32 bytes key and 200 bytes value) which compacts to ~5 SST files (target file size 256 MB) in L6 without compression. I tested readrandom performance with various block cache size (to mimic various cache hit rates):
```
SETUP
make OPTIMIZE_LEVEL="-O3" USE_LTO=1 DEBUG_LEVEL=0 -j32 db_bench
./db_bench -benchmarks=fillseq,compact0,waitforcompaction,compact,waitforcompaction -write_buffer_size=33554432 -level_compaction_dynamic_level_bytes=true -max_background_jobs=8 -target_file_size_base=268435456 --num=5000000 --key_size=32 --value_size=200 --compression_type=none
BENCHMARK
./db_bench --use_existing_db -benchmarks=readtocache,readrandom[-X10] --num=5000000 --key_size=32 --disable_auto_compactions --reads=1000000 --block_protection_bytes_per_key=[0|1] --cache_size=$CACHESIZE
The readrandom ops/sec looks like the following:
Block cache size: 2GB 1.2GB * 0.9 1.2GB * 0.8 1.2GB * 0.5 8MB
Main 240805 223604 198176 161653 139040
PR prot_bytes=0 238691 226693 200127 161082 141153
PR prot_bytes=1 214983 193199 178532 137013 108211
prot_bytes=1 vs -10% -15% -10.8% -15% -23%
prot_bytes=0
```
The benchmark has a lot of variance, but there was a 5% to 25% regression in this benchmark with different cache hit rates.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/pull/11287
Reviewed By: ajkr
Differential Revision: D43970708
Pulled By: cbi42
fbshipit-source-id: ef98d898b71779846fa74212b9ec9e08b7183940
Changyu Bi