Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

storage: change default engine type from RocksDB to Pebble #7562

Closed
jseldess opened this issue Jun 24, 2020 · 3 comments · Fixed by #8833
Closed

storage: change default engine type from RocksDB to Pebble #7562

jseldess opened this issue Jun 24, 2020 · 3 comments · Fixed by #8833
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@jseldess
Copy link
Contributor

PR: cockroachdb/cockroach#48145

From release notes:

Changed the default engine type for new storage directories from RocksDB to Pebble. Existing stores will continue to use the previously specified storage engine, and an explicit specification (via --storage-engine=...) will override the default. [#48145][#48145] {% comment %}doc{% endcomment %}

@johnrk-zz
Copy link

@itsbilal, can you help @rmloveland with defining what we should include in our docs for Pebble being enabled by default in 20.2?

@itsbilal
Copy link
Member

itsbilal commented Sep 9, 2020

Sure! Happy to help with that.

Basic takeaway: The --storage-engine flag is no longer sticky, and Pebble is no longer experimental or opt-in. We always use Pebble on 20.2 unless --storage-engine=rocksdb is specified at every node start. Bidirectional compatibility between the two engines still exists. Happy to elaborate on any other specifics!

@rmloveland
Copy link
Contributor

Thank you Bilal! I think that is enough for me to get started with, and I will reach out with specific questions as needed.

rmloveland added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 3, 2020
Fixes #7562 #8392 #8595

Summary of changes:

- Update almost all mentions of "RocksDB" across the 20.2 docs to say
  "the storage engine" as often as possible, and "Pebble" where we must
  because it is relevant.

- In particular, update the architecture's storage layer docs to mention
  Pebble and link to the Github repo and announcement blog post.
rmloveland added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 4, 2020
Fixes #7562 #8392 #8595

Summary of changes:

- Update almost all mentions of "RocksDB" across the 20.2 docs to say
  "the storage engine" as often as possible, and "Pebble" where we must
  because it is relevant.

- In particular, update the architecture's storage layer docs to mention
  Pebble and link to the Github repo and announcement blog post.
rmloveland added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 6, 2020
Fixes #7562 #8392 #8595.

Summary of changes:

- Update almost all mentions of "RocksDB" across the 20.2 docs to say
  "the storage engine" as often as possible, and mention Pebble where we
  need to because it is relevant.  Additionally, we mention some
  benefits of Pebble w.r.t. optimizations it makes possible in
  CockroachDB.  Where necessary, we continue to mention RockDB since it
  will remain an option in v20.2.

- In particular, update the architecture's storage layer docs to mention
  Pebble and link to the Github repo and announcement blog post, and the
  the bulk import optimization blog post that highlights interesting
  work on Pebble.
rmloveland added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 9, 2020
Fixes #7562 #8392 #8595.

Summary of changes:

- Update almost all mentions of "RocksDB" across the 20.2 docs to say
  "the storage engine" as often as possible, and mention Pebble where we
  need to because it is relevant.  Additionally, we mention some
  benefits of Pebble w.r.t. optimizations it makes possible in
  CockroachDB.  Where necessary, we continue to mention RockDB since it
  will remain an option in v20.2.

- In particular, update the architecture's storage layer docs to mention
  Pebble and link to the Github repo and announcement blog post, and the
  the bulk import optimization blog post that highlights interesting
  work on Pebble.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants