This repository has been archived by the owner on Aug 23, 2023. It is now read-only.
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 104
update memory index prune to hold write lock as briefly as possible #787
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
unrelated to this PR, but this looks incorrect. seems like m.delete may delete several paths (children), this assumes 1
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Doesn't the
if !n.Leaf() {
check on line 912 mean that there should never be children? We could add that same check here in case of a race condition where a child is added to a series that's about to be pruned, but that seems like a highly unlikely scenario.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
the only thing that branch does is assure that nodes without metricdefs (data corresponding to that path) are not subject to pruning.
nodes with metricdefs (leaf nodes) are subject to pruning. I think the confusion here is because
in our implementation, a path can be both a leaf and have children.
e.g.
foo.bar
can have data/metricdef (making it a leaf), whilefoo.bar.baz
also exists (making foo.bar a branch)In graphite this doesn't work, but some of our customers wanted this behavior, and it seemed fairly easy to support, so that's why we do.
the
m.delete
call is recursive: it deletes the path, and any sub-paths (I think i actually just discovered a related bug here), so what we should do is track the actual amount of paths that got deleted by the delete call, or I think better: the pruning process shouldn't recursively delete, but rather only delete leaves (and clean up stale branch nodes that no longer have children)But this warrants a new ticket, so i opened #797