HBASE-23296 Add CompositeBucketCache to support tiered BC #868
Conversation
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
ramkrish86
reviewed
Nov 22, 2019
| private static FirstLevelBlockCache createFirstLevelCache(final Configuration c) { | ||
| private static BlockCache createFirstLevelCache(final Configuration c) { | ||
| if (c.getBoolean(BUCKET_CACHE_COMPOSITE_KEY, false)) { | ||
| return createBucketCache(c, CacheLevel.L1); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So L1 can be offheap - I mean the engine type and L2 is a seperate bucket cache and so it can be on file also? If both has to be offheap - we should recommend the memory usage part also. Say how much % will be good for L1 and how much for L2.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We have exposed some conf key for each level's BucketCache (see CompositeBucketCache), such as the ioengine and cacheSize.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes. I saw it now. The bucket cache's hash map was considered to take significant space and was optimized by some JIRA by @anoopsjohn . So now with this tiered cache it may be having some more impact. But all those for later just saying. Will take a closer look at the patch.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The bucket cache's hash map was considered to take significant space and was optimized by some JIRA by @anoopsjohn
That's great! is there any JIRA to track with? looking forward on it.
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
chenxu14
force-pushed
the
HBASE-23296
branch
from
03656de to
4005a81
Compare
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
ramkrish86
reviewed
Nov 27, 2019
| protected final FirstLevelBlockCache l1Cache; | ||
| protected final BlockCache l2Cache; | ||
| protected final CombinedCacheStats combinedCacheStats; | ||
| public class CombinedBlockCache extends CompositeBlockCache implements ResizableBlockCache { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So compositeBlockCache is the base now. CombinedBlockCache is a type of it. good.
ramkrish86
reviewed
Nov 27, 2019
| persistentPath = c.get(CompositeBucketCache.PERSISTENT_PATH_L1); | ||
| break; | ||
| case L2: | ||
| default: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We need to LOG that we are creating both L1 and L2 caches as bucket cache.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add some log like this:
LOG.info("Creating BucketCache for {}, ioengine : {}, cacheSize {}.", level, bucketCacheIOEngineName, bucketCacheSize);
chenxu14
force-pushed
the
HBASE-23296
branch
2 times, most recently
from
870e224 to
bd3a54a
Compare
ramkrish86
approved these changes
Nov 28, 2019
| public static final String PERSISTENT_PATH_L2 = "hbase.bucketcache.l2.persistent.path"; | ||
|
|
||
| public CompositeBucketCache(BucketCache l1Cache, BucketCache l2Cache) { | ||
| super(l1Cache, l2Cache); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When the L1\2 Bucket cache emits the statistics - you may have to log it with the the level of the cache info also?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, maybe i have a misunderstood, will do this later
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Make CacheLevel as an constructor arg of BucketCache, in order to do some logging
chenxu14
force-pushed
the
HBASE-23296
branch
from
bd3a54a to
995dbcb
Compare
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
anoopsjohn
reviewed
Dec 2, 2019
| @@ -28,6 +28,10 @@ | |||
| */ | |||
| @InterfaceAudience.Private | |||
| public interface BlockCache extends Iterable<CachedBlock> { | |||
| public enum CacheLevel { | |||
| L1, L2 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When we have on heap cache and a BucketCache, or 2 Bucket Cache are we making it like L1 and L2 really now? That the caching of all blocks starts with L1 and L2 is victim handler for the eviction? I think no. If so better to avoid the term L1 and L2 IMHO. We have done that as part of some work and removed this. Not getting other naming also. Suggestions?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you think it's better to naming L1 as metaCache, L2 as dataCache?
|
Any updates here guys? @ramkrish86 @anoopsjohn @chenxu14 |
This feature enabled on our own branch only, has no updates for now, any advise for how to improve this? |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
Any updates here? |
|
Resovling. No updates. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
No description provided.