1. 23 8月, 2016 1 次提交
  2. 18 8月, 2016 1 次提交
  3. 16 8月, 2016 1 次提交
  4. 12 8月, 2016 2 次提交
  5. 07 8月, 2016 1 次提交
  6. 05 8月, 2016 1 次提交
  7. 30 7月, 2016 3 次提交
  8. 29 7月, 2016 1 次提交
  9. 27 7月, 2016 2 次提交
  10. 24 7月, 2016 1 次提交
  11. 23 7月, 2016 1 次提交
  12. 18 7月, 2016 1 次提交
  13. 17 7月, 2016 1 次提交
  14. 06 7月, 2016 1 次提交
  15. 18 6月, 2016 1 次提交
    • S
      Deprectate filter_deletes · 7b79238b
      sdong 提交于
      Summary: filter_deltes is not a frequently used feature. Remove it.
      
      Test Plan: Run all test suites.
      
      Reviewers: igor, yhchiang, IslamAbdelRahman
      
      Reviewed By: IslamAbdelRahman
      
      Subscribers: leveldb, andrewkr, dhruba
      
      Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D59427
      7b79238b
  16. 15 6月, 2016 1 次提交
  17. 11 6月, 2016 2 次提交
    • S
      Fix Java Break Related to memtable bloom bits to size ratio change · 2a79af1c
      sdong 提交于
      Summary: Need to change several more places for the change to fix Java tests
      
      Test Plan:
      make jtest
      under java, run "make db_bench"
      
      Reviewers: yhchiang, andrewkr, IslamAbdelRahman
      
      Reviewed By: IslamAbdelRahman
      
      Subscribers: leveldb, andrewkr, dhruba
      
      Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D59541
      2a79af1c
    • S
      memtable_prefix_bloom_bits -> memtable_prefix_bloom_bits_ratio and deprecate... · 20699df8
      sdong 提交于
      memtable_prefix_bloom_bits -> memtable_prefix_bloom_bits_ratio and deprecate memtable_prefix_bloom_probes
      
      Summary:
      memtable_prefix_bloom_probes is not a critical option. Remove it to reduce number of options.
      It's easier for users to make mistakes with memtable_prefix_bloom_bits, turn it to memtable_prefix_bloom_bits_ratio
      
      Test Plan: Run all existing tests
      
      Reviewers: yhchiang, igor, IslamAbdelRahman
      
      Reviewed By: IslamAbdelRahman
      
      Subscribers: gunnarku, yoshinorim, MarkCallaghan, leveldb, andrewkr, dhruba
      
      Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D59199
      20699df8
  18. 08 6月, 2016 1 次提交
  19. 07 6月, 2016 1 次提交
  20. 04 6月, 2016 1 次提交
  21. 07 5月, 2016 2 次提交
  22. 20 4月, 2016 1 次提交
  23. 02 4月, 2016 2 次提交
    • A
      Merge pull request #1053 from adamretter/benchmark-java-comparator · 20065406
      Adam Retter 提交于
      Benchmark Java comparator vs C++ comparator
      20065406
    • M
      Adding pin_l0_filter_and_index_blocks_in_cache feature and related fixes. · 9b519875
      Marton Trencseni 提交于
      Summary:
      When a block based table file is opened, if prefetch_index_and_filter is true, it will prefetch the index and filter blocks, putting them into the block cache.
      What this feature adds: when a L0 block based table file is opened, if pin_l0_filter_and_index_blocks_in_cache is true in the options (and prefetch_index_and_filter is true), then the filter and index blocks aren't released back to the block cache at the end of BlockBasedTableReader::Open(). Instead the table reader takes ownership of them, hence pinning them, ie. the LRU cache will never push them out. Meanwhile in the table reader, further accesses will not hit the block cache, thus avoiding lock contention.
      
      Test Plan:
      'export TEST_TMPDIR=/dev/shm/ && DISABLE_JEMALLOC=1 OPT=-g make all valgrind_check -j32' is OK.
      I didn't run the Java tests, I don't have Java set up on my devserver.
      
      Reviewers: sdong
      
      Reviewed By: sdong
      
      Subscribers: andrewkr, dhruba
      
      Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D56133
      9b519875
  24. 22 3月, 2016 2 次提交
  25. 19 3月, 2016 1 次提交
  26. 18 3月, 2016 1 次提交
    • M
      Adding pin_l0_filter_and_index_blocks_in_cache feature. · 522de4f5
      Marton Trencseni 提交于
      Summary:
      When a block based table file is opened, if prefetch_index_and_filter is true, it will prefetch the index and filter blocks, putting them into the block cache.
      What this feature adds: when a L0 block based table file is opened, if pin_l0_filter_and_index_blocks_in_cache is true in the options (and prefetch_index_and_filter is true), then the filter and index blocks aren't released back to the block cache at the end of BlockBasedTableReader::Open(). Instead the table reader takes ownership of them, hence pinning them, ie. the LRU cache will never push them out. Meanwhile in the table reader, further accesses will not hit the block cache, thus avoiding lock contention.
      When the table reader is destroyed, it releases the pinned blocks (if there were any). This has to happen before the cache is destroyed, so I had to introduce a TableReader::Close(), to guarantee the order of destruction.
      
      Test Plan:
      Added two unit tests for this. Existing unit tests run fine (default is pin_l0_filter_and_index_blocks_in_cache=false).
      
      DISABLE_JEMALLOC=1 OPT=-g make all valgrind_check -j32
        Mac: OK.
        Linux: with D55287 patched in it's OK.
      
      Reviewers: sdong
      
      Reviewed By: sdong
      
      Subscribers: andrewkr, leveldb, dhruba
      
      Differential Revision: https://reviews.facebook.net/D54801
      522de4f5
  27. 02 3月, 2016 4 次提交
  28. 10 2月, 2016 2 次提交