You can not select more than 25 topics Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.

DfsGarbageCollector.java 25KB

DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
DFS: A storage layer for JGit In practice the DHT storage layer has not been performing as well as large scale server environments want to see from a Git server. The performance of the DHT schema degrades rapidly as small changes are pushed into the repository due to the chunk size being less than 1/3 of the pushed pack size. Small chunks cause poor prefetch performance during reading, and require significantly longer prefetch lists inside of the chunk meta field to work around the small size. The DHT code is very complex (>17,000 lines of code) and is very sensitive to the underlying database round-trip time, as well as the way objects were written into the pack stream that was chunked and stored on the database. A poor pack layout (from any version of C Git prior to Junio reworking it) can cause the DHT code to be unable to enumerate the objects of the linux-2.6 repository in a completable time scale. Performing a clone from a DHT stored repository of 2 million objects takes 2 million row lookups in the DHT to locate the OBJECT_INDEX row for each object being cloned. This is very difficult for some DHTs to scale, even at 5000 rows/second the lookup stage alone takes 6 minutes (on local filesystem, this is almost too fast to bother measuring). Some servers like Apache Cassandra just fall over and cannot complete the 2 million lookups in rapid fire. On a ~400 MiB repository, the DHT schema has an extra 25 MiB of redundant data that gets downloaded to the JGit process, and that is before you consider the cost of the OBJECT_INDEX table also being fully loaded, which is at least 223 MiB of data for the linux kernel repository. In the DHT schema answering a `git clone` of the ~400 MiB linux kernel needs to load 248 MiB of "index" data from the DHT, in addition to the ~400 MiB of pack data that gets sent to the client. This is 193 MiB more data to be accessed than the native filesystem format, but it needs to come over a much smaller pipe (local Ethernet typically) than the local SATA disk drive. I also never got around to writing the "repack" support for the DHT schema, as it turns out to be fairly complex to safely repack data in the repository while also trying to minimize the amount of changes made to the database, due to very common limitations on database mutation rates.. This new DFS storage layer fixes a lot of those issues by taking the simple approach for storing relatively standard Git pack and index files on an abstract filesystem. Packs are accessed by an in-process buffer cache, similar to the WindowCache used by the local filesystem storage layer. Unlike the local file IO, there are some assumptions that the storage system has relatively high latency and no concept of "file handles". Instead it looks at the file more like HTTP byte range requests, where a read channel is a simply a thunk to trigger a read request over the network. The DFS code in this change is still abstract, it does not store on any particular filesystem, but is fairly well suited to the Amazon S3 or Apache Hadoop HDFS. Storing packs directly on HDFS rather than HBase removes a layer of abstraction, as most HBase row reads turn into an HDFS read. Most of the DFS code in this change was blatently copied from the local filesystem code. Most parts should be refactored to be shared between the two storage systems, but right now I am hesistent to do this due to how well tuned the local filesystem code currently is. Change-Id: Iec524abdf172e9ec5485d6c88ca6512cd8a6eafb
13 anni fa
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383384385386387388389390391392393394395396397398399400401402403404405406407408409410411412413414415416417418419420421422423424425426427428429430431432433434435436437438439440441442443444445446447448449450451452453454455456457458459460461462463464465466467468469470471472473474475476477478479480481482483484485486487488489490491492493494495496497498499500501502503504505506507508509510511512513514515516517518519520521522523524525526527528529530531532533534535536537538539540541542543544545546547548549550551552553554555556557558559560561562563564565566567568569570571572573574575576577578579580581582583584585586587588589590591592593594595596597598599600601602603604605606607608609610611612613614615616617618619620621622623624625626627628629630631632633634635636637638639640641642643644645646647648649650651652653654655656657658659660661662663664665666667668669670671672673674675676677678679680681682683684685686687688689690691692693694695696697698699700701702703704705706707708709710711712713714715716717718719720721722723724725726727728729730731732733734735736737738739740741742743744745746747748749750751752753754755756757758759760761762763764765766767768769770771772773774775776777778779780781782783784785786787788
  1. /*
  2. * Copyright (C) 2011, Google Inc.
  3. * and other copyright owners as documented in the project's IP log.
  4. *
  5. * This program and the accompanying materials are made available
  6. * under the terms of the Eclipse Distribution License v1.0 which
  7. * accompanies this distribution, is reproduced below, and is
  8. * available at http://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/edl-v10.php
  9. *
  10. * All rights reserved.
  11. *
  12. * Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or
  13. * without modification, are permitted provided that the following
  14. * conditions are met:
  15. *
  16. * - Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
  17. * notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
  18. *
  19. * - Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above
  20. * copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following
  21. * disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided
  22. * with the distribution.
  23. *
  24. * - Neither the name of the Eclipse Foundation, Inc. nor the
  25. * names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote
  26. * products derived from this software without specific prior
  27. * written permission.
  28. *
  29. * THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND
  30. * CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES,
  31. * INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES
  32. * OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE
  33. * ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT OWNER OR
  34. * CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL,
  35. * SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT
  36. * NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES;
  37. * LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER
  38. * CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT,
  39. * STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE)
  40. * ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF
  41. * ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
  42. */
  43. package org.eclipse.jgit.internal.storage.dfs;
  44. import static org.eclipse.jgit.internal.storage.dfs.DfsObjDatabase.PackSource.COMPACT;
  45. import static org.eclipse.jgit.internal.storage.dfs.DfsObjDatabase.PackSource.GC;
  46. import static org.eclipse.jgit.internal.storage.dfs.DfsObjDatabase.PackSource.GC_REST;
  47. import static org.eclipse.jgit.internal.storage.dfs.DfsObjDatabase.PackSource.GC_TXN;
  48. import static org.eclipse.jgit.internal.storage.dfs.DfsObjDatabase.PackSource.INSERT;
  49. import static org.eclipse.jgit.internal.storage.dfs.DfsObjDatabase.PackSource.RECEIVE;
  50. import static org.eclipse.jgit.internal.storage.dfs.DfsObjDatabase.PackSource.UNREACHABLE_GARBAGE;
  51. import static org.eclipse.jgit.internal.storage.dfs.DfsPackCompactor.configureReftable;
  52. import static org.eclipse.jgit.internal.storage.pack.PackExt.BITMAP_INDEX;
  53. import static org.eclipse.jgit.internal.storage.pack.PackExt.INDEX;
  54. import static org.eclipse.jgit.internal.storage.pack.PackExt.PACK;
  55. import static org.eclipse.jgit.internal.storage.pack.PackExt.REFTABLE;
  56. import static org.eclipse.jgit.internal.storage.pack.PackWriter.NONE;
  57. import java.io.IOException;
  58. import java.util.ArrayList;
  59. import java.util.Arrays;
  60. import java.util.Calendar;
  61. import java.util.Collection;
  62. import java.util.EnumSet;
  63. import java.util.GregorianCalendar;
  64. import java.util.HashSet;
  65. import java.util.List;
  66. import java.util.Set;
  67. import java.util.concurrent.TimeUnit;
  68. import org.eclipse.jgit.internal.JGitText;
  69. import org.eclipse.jgit.internal.storage.dfs.DfsObjDatabase.PackSource;
  70. import org.eclipse.jgit.internal.storage.file.PackIndex;
  71. import org.eclipse.jgit.internal.storage.file.PackReverseIndex;
  72. import org.eclipse.jgit.internal.storage.pack.PackExt;
  73. import org.eclipse.jgit.internal.storage.pack.PackWriter;
  74. import org.eclipse.jgit.internal.storage.reftable.ReftableCompactor;
  75. import org.eclipse.jgit.internal.storage.reftable.ReftableConfig;
  76. import org.eclipse.jgit.internal.storage.reftable.ReftableWriter;
  77. import org.eclipse.jgit.internal.storage.reftree.RefTreeNames;
  78. import org.eclipse.jgit.lib.AnyObjectId;
  79. import org.eclipse.jgit.lib.Constants;
  80. import org.eclipse.jgit.lib.NullProgressMonitor;
  81. import org.eclipse.jgit.lib.ObjectId;
  82. import org.eclipse.jgit.lib.ObjectIdSet;
  83. import org.eclipse.jgit.lib.ProgressMonitor;
  84. import org.eclipse.jgit.lib.Ref;
  85. import org.eclipse.jgit.lib.RefDatabase;
  86. import org.eclipse.jgit.revwalk.RevWalk;
  87. import org.eclipse.jgit.storage.pack.PackConfig;
  88. import org.eclipse.jgit.storage.pack.PackStatistics;
  89. import org.eclipse.jgit.util.SystemReader;
  90. import org.eclipse.jgit.util.io.CountingOutputStream;
  91. /**
  92. * Repack and garbage collect a repository.
  93. */
  94. public class DfsGarbageCollector {
  95. private final DfsRepository repo;
  96. private final RefDatabase refdb;
  97. private final DfsObjDatabase objdb;
  98. private final List<DfsPackDescription> newPackDesc;
  99. private final List<PackStatistics> newPackStats;
  100. private final List<ObjectIdSet> newPackObj;
  101. private DfsReader ctx;
  102. private PackConfig packConfig;
  103. private ReftableConfig reftableConfig;
  104. private boolean convertToReftable = true;
  105. private boolean includeDeletes;
  106. private long reftableInitialMinUpdateIndex = 1;
  107. private long reftableInitialMaxUpdateIndex = 1;
  108. // See packIsCoalesceableGarbage(), below, for how these two variables
  109. // interact.
  110. private long coalesceGarbageLimit = 50 << 20;
  111. private long garbageTtlMillis = TimeUnit.DAYS.toMillis(1);
  112. private long startTimeMillis;
  113. private List<DfsPackFile> packsBefore;
  114. private List<DfsReftable> reftablesBefore;
  115. private List<DfsPackFile> expiredGarbagePacks;
  116. private Collection<Ref> refsBefore;
  117. private Set<ObjectId> allHeadsAndTags;
  118. private Set<ObjectId> allTags;
  119. private Set<ObjectId> nonHeads;
  120. private Set<ObjectId> txnHeads;
  121. private Set<ObjectId> tagTargets;
  122. /**
  123. * Initialize a garbage collector.
  124. *
  125. * @param repository
  126. * repository objects to be packed will be read from.
  127. */
  128. public DfsGarbageCollector(DfsRepository repository) {
  129. repo = repository;
  130. refdb = repo.getRefDatabase();
  131. objdb = repo.getObjectDatabase();
  132. newPackDesc = new ArrayList<>(4);
  133. newPackStats = new ArrayList<>(4);
  134. newPackObj = new ArrayList<>(4);
  135. packConfig = new PackConfig(repo);
  136. packConfig.setIndexVersion(2);
  137. }
  138. /**
  139. * Get configuration used to generate the new pack file.
  140. *
  141. * @return configuration used to generate the new pack file.
  142. */
  143. public PackConfig getPackConfig() {
  144. return packConfig;
  145. }
  146. /**
  147. * Set the new configuration to use when creating the pack file.
  148. *
  149. * @param newConfig
  150. * the new configuration to use when creating the pack file.
  151. * @return {@code this}
  152. */
  153. public DfsGarbageCollector setPackConfig(PackConfig newConfig) {
  154. packConfig = newConfig;
  155. return this;
  156. }
  157. /**
  158. * Set configuration to write a reftable.
  159. *
  160. * @param cfg
  161. * configuration to write a reftable. Reftable writing is
  162. * disabled (default) when {@code cfg} is {@code null}.
  163. * @return {@code this}
  164. */
  165. public DfsGarbageCollector setReftableConfig(ReftableConfig cfg) {
  166. reftableConfig = cfg;
  167. return this;
  168. }
  169. /**
  170. * Whether the garbage collector should convert references to reftable.
  171. *
  172. * @param convert
  173. * if {@code true}, {@link #setReftableConfig(ReftableConfig)}
  174. * has been set non-null, and a GC reftable doesn't yet exist,
  175. * the garbage collector will make one by scanning the existing
  176. * references, and writing a new reftable. Default is
  177. * {@code true}.
  178. * @return {@code this}
  179. */
  180. public DfsGarbageCollector setConvertToReftable(boolean convert) {
  181. convertToReftable = convert;
  182. return this;
  183. }
  184. /**
  185. * Whether the garbage collector will include tombstones for deleted
  186. * references in the reftable.
  187. *
  188. * @param include
  189. * if {@code true}, the garbage collector will include tombstones
  190. * for deleted references in the reftable. Default is
  191. * {@code false}.
  192. * @return {@code this}
  193. */
  194. public DfsGarbageCollector setIncludeDeletes(boolean include) {
  195. includeDeletes = include;
  196. return this;
  197. }
  198. /**
  199. * Set minUpdateIndex for the initial reftable created during conversion.
  200. *
  201. * @param u
  202. * minUpdateIndex for the initial reftable created by scanning
  203. * {@link org.eclipse.jgit.internal.storage.dfs.DfsRefDatabase#getRefs(String)}.
  204. * Ignored unless caller has also set
  205. * {@link #setReftableConfig(ReftableConfig)}. Defaults to
  206. * {@code 1}. Must be {@code u >= 0}.
  207. * @return {@code this}
  208. */
  209. public DfsGarbageCollector setReftableInitialMinUpdateIndex(long u) {
  210. reftableInitialMinUpdateIndex = Math.max(u, 0);
  211. return this;
  212. }
  213. /**
  214. * Set maxUpdateIndex for the initial reftable created during conversion.
  215. *
  216. * @param u
  217. * maxUpdateIndex for the initial reftable created by scanning
  218. * {@link org.eclipse.jgit.internal.storage.dfs.DfsRefDatabase#getRefs(String)}.
  219. * Ignored unless caller has also set
  220. * {@link #setReftableConfig(ReftableConfig)}. Defaults to
  221. * {@code 1}. Must be {@code u >= 0}.
  222. * @return {@code this}
  223. */
  224. public DfsGarbageCollector setReftableInitialMaxUpdateIndex(long u) {
  225. reftableInitialMaxUpdateIndex = Math.max(0, u);
  226. return this;
  227. }
  228. /**
  229. * Get coalesce garbage limit
  230. *
  231. * @return coalesce garbage limit, packs smaller than this size will be
  232. * repacked.
  233. */
  234. public long getCoalesceGarbageLimit() {
  235. return coalesceGarbageLimit;
  236. }
  237. /**
  238. * Set the byte size limit for garbage packs to be repacked.
  239. * <p>
  240. * Any UNREACHABLE_GARBAGE pack smaller than this limit will be repacked at
  241. * the end of the run. This allows the garbage collector to coalesce
  242. * unreachable objects into a single file.
  243. * <p>
  244. * If an UNREACHABLE_GARBAGE pack is already larger than this limit it will
  245. * be left alone by the garbage collector. This avoids unnecessary disk IO
  246. * reading and copying the objects.
  247. * <p>
  248. * If limit is set to 0 the UNREACHABLE_GARBAGE coalesce is disabled.<br>
  249. * If limit is set to {@link java.lang.Long#MAX_VALUE}, everything is
  250. * coalesced.
  251. * <p>
  252. * Keeping unreachable garbage prevents race conditions with repository
  253. * changes that may suddenly need an object whose only copy was stored in
  254. * the UNREACHABLE_GARBAGE pack.
  255. *
  256. * @param limit
  257. * size in bytes.
  258. * @return {@code this}
  259. */
  260. public DfsGarbageCollector setCoalesceGarbageLimit(long limit) {
  261. coalesceGarbageLimit = limit;
  262. return this;
  263. }
  264. /**
  265. * Get time to live for garbage packs.
  266. *
  267. * @return garbage packs older than this limit (in milliseconds) will be
  268. * pruned as part of the garbage collection process if the value is
  269. * &gt; 0, otherwise garbage packs are retained.
  270. */
  271. public long getGarbageTtlMillis() {
  272. return garbageTtlMillis;
  273. }
  274. /**
  275. * Set the time to live for garbage objects.
  276. * <p>
  277. * Any UNREACHABLE_GARBAGE older than this limit will be pruned at the end
  278. * of the run.
  279. * <p>
  280. * If timeToLiveMillis is set to 0, UNREACHABLE_GARBAGE purging is disabled.
  281. *
  282. * @param ttl
  283. * Time to live whatever unit is specified.
  284. * @param unit
  285. * The specified time unit.
  286. * @return {@code this}
  287. */
  288. public DfsGarbageCollector setGarbageTtl(long ttl, TimeUnit unit) {
  289. garbageTtlMillis = unit.toMillis(ttl);
  290. return this;
  291. }
  292. /**
  293. * Create a single new pack file containing all of the live objects.
  294. * <p>
  295. * This method safely decides which packs can be expired after the new pack
  296. * is created by validating the references have not been modified in an
  297. * incompatible way.
  298. *
  299. * @param pm
  300. * progress monitor to receive updates on as packing may take a
  301. * while, depending on the size of the repository.
  302. * @return true if the repack was successful without race conditions. False
  303. * if a race condition was detected and the repack should be run
  304. * again later.
  305. * @throws java.io.IOException
  306. * a new pack cannot be created.
  307. */
  308. public boolean pack(ProgressMonitor pm) throws IOException {
  309. if (pm == null)
  310. pm = NullProgressMonitor.INSTANCE;
  311. if (packConfig.getIndexVersion() != 2)
  312. throw new IllegalStateException(
  313. JGitText.get().supportOnlyPackIndexVersion2);
  314. startTimeMillis = SystemReader.getInstance().getCurrentTime();
  315. ctx = objdb.newReader();
  316. try {
  317. refdb.refresh();
  318. objdb.clearCache();
  319. refsBefore = getAllRefs();
  320. readPacksBefore();
  321. readReftablesBefore();
  322. Set<ObjectId> allHeads = new HashSet<>();
  323. allHeadsAndTags = new HashSet<>();
  324. allTags = new HashSet<>();
  325. nonHeads = new HashSet<>();
  326. txnHeads = new HashSet<>();
  327. tagTargets = new HashSet<>();
  328. for (Ref ref : refsBefore) {
  329. if (ref.isSymbolic() || ref.getObjectId() == null) {
  330. continue;
  331. }
  332. if (isHead(ref)) {
  333. allHeads.add(ref.getObjectId());
  334. } else if (isTag(ref)) {
  335. allTags.add(ref.getObjectId());
  336. } else if (RefTreeNames.isRefTree(refdb, ref.getName())) {
  337. txnHeads.add(ref.getObjectId());
  338. } else {
  339. nonHeads.add(ref.getObjectId());
  340. }
  341. if (ref.getPeeledObjectId() != null) {
  342. tagTargets.add(ref.getPeeledObjectId());
  343. }
  344. }
  345. // Don't exclude tags that are also branch tips.
  346. allTags.removeAll(allHeads);
  347. allHeadsAndTags.addAll(allHeads);
  348. allHeadsAndTags.addAll(allTags);
  349. // Hoist all branch tips and tags earlier in the pack file
  350. tagTargets.addAll(allHeadsAndTags);
  351. // Combine the GC_REST objects into the GC pack if requested
  352. if (packConfig.getSinglePack()) {
  353. allHeadsAndTags.addAll(nonHeads);
  354. nonHeads.clear();
  355. }
  356. boolean rollback = true;
  357. try {
  358. packHeads(pm);
  359. packRest(pm);
  360. packRefTreeGraph(pm);
  361. packGarbage(pm);
  362. objdb.commitPack(newPackDesc, toPrune());
  363. rollback = false;
  364. return true;
  365. } finally {
  366. if (rollback)
  367. objdb.rollbackPack(newPackDesc);
  368. }
  369. } finally {
  370. ctx.close();
  371. }
  372. }
  373. private Collection<Ref> getAllRefs() throws IOException {
  374. Collection<Ref> refs = refdb.getRefs();
  375. List<Ref> addl = refdb.getAdditionalRefs();
  376. if (!addl.isEmpty()) {
  377. List<Ref> all = new ArrayList<>(refs.size() + addl.size());
  378. all.addAll(refs);
  379. // add additional refs which start with refs/
  380. for (Ref r : addl) {
  381. if (r.getName().startsWith(Constants.R_REFS)) {
  382. all.add(r);
  383. }
  384. }
  385. return all;
  386. }
  387. return refs;
  388. }
  389. private void readPacksBefore() throws IOException {
  390. DfsPackFile[] packs = objdb.getPacks();
  391. packsBefore = new ArrayList<>(packs.length);
  392. expiredGarbagePacks = new ArrayList<>(packs.length);
  393. long now = SystemReader.getInstance().getCurrentTime();
  394. for (DfsPackFile p : packs) {
  395. DfsPackDescription d = p.getPackDescription();
  396. if (d.getPackSource() != UNREACHABLE_GARBAGE) {
  397. packsBefore.add(p);
  398. } else if (packIsExpiredGarbage(d, now)) {
  399. expiredGarbagePacks.add(p);
  400. } else if (packIsCoalesceableGarbage(d, now)) {
  401. packsBefore.add(p);
  402. }
  403. }
  404. }
  405. private void readReftablesBefore() throws IOException {
  406. DfsReftable[] tables = objdb.getReftables();
  407. reftablesBefore = new ArrayList<>(Arrays.asList(tables));
  408. }
  409. private boolean packIsExpiredGarbage(DfsPackDescription d, long now) {
  410. // Consider the garbage pack as expired when it's older than
  411. // garbagePackTtl. This check gives concurrent inserter threads
  412. // sufficient time to identify an object is not in the graph and should
  413. // have a new copy written, rather than relying on something from an
  414. // UNREACHABLE_GARBAGE pack.
  415. return d.getPackSource() == UNREACHABLE_GARBAGE
  416. && garbageTtlMillis > 0
  417. && now - d.getLastModified() >= garbageTtlMillis;
  418. }
  419. private boolean packIsCoalesceableGarbage(DfsPackDescription d, long now) {
  420. // An UNREACHABLE_GARBAGE pack can be coalesced if its size is less than
  421. // the coalesceGarbageLimit and either garbageTtl is zero or if the pack
  422. // is created in a close time interval (on a single calendar day when
  423. // the garbageTtl is more than one day or one third of the garbageTtl).
  424. //
  425. // When the garbageTtl is more than 24 hours, garbage packs that are
  426. // created within a single calendar day are coalesced together. This
  427. // would make the effective ttl of the garbage pack as garbageTtl+23:59
  428. // and limit the number of garbage to a maximum number of
  429. // garbageTtl_in_days + 1 (assuming all of them are less than the size
  430. // of coalesceGarbageLimit).
  431. //
  432. // When the garbageTtl is less than or equal to 24 hours, garbage packs
  433. // that are created within a one third of garbageTtl are coalesced
  434. // together. This would make the effective ttl of the garbage packs as
  435. // garbageTtl + (garbageTtl / 3) and would limit the number of garbage
  436. // packs to a maximum number of 4 (assuming all of them are less than
  437. // the size of coalesceGarbageLimit).
  438. if (d.getPackSource() != UNREACHABLE_GARBAGE
  439. || d.getFileSize(PackExt.PACK) >= coalesceGarbageLimit) {
  440. return false;
  441. }
  442. if (garbageTtlMillis == 0) {
  443. return true;
  444. }
  445. long lastModified = d.getLastModified();
  446. long dayStartLastModified = dayStartInMillis(lastModified);
  447. long dayStartToday = dayStartInMillis(now);
  448. if (dayStartLastModified != dayStartToday) {
  449. return false; // this pack is not created today.
  450. }
  451. if (garbageTtlMillis > TimeUnit.DAYS.toMillis(1)) {
  452. return true; // ttl is more than one day and pack is created today.
  453. }
  454. long timeInterval = garbageTtlMillis / 3;
  455. if (timeInterval == 0) {
  456. return false; // ttl is too small, don't try to coalesce.
  457. }
  458. long modifiedTimeSlot = (lastModified - dayStartLastModified) / timeInterval;
  459. long presentTimeSlot = (now - dayStartToday) / timeInterval;
  460. return modifiedTimeSlot == presentTimeSlot;
  461. }
  462. private static long dayStartInMillis(long timeInMillis) {
  463. Calendar cal = new GregorianCalendar(
  464. SystemReader.getInstance().getTimeZone());
  465. cal.setTimeInMillis(timeInMillis);
  466. cal.set(Calendar.HOUR_OF_DAY, 0);
  467. cal.set(Calendar.MINUTE, 0);
  468. cal.set(Calendar.SECOND, 0);
  469. cal.set(Calendar.MILLISECOND, 0);
  470. return cal.getTimeInMillis();
  471. }
  472. /**
  473. * Get all of the source packs that fed into this compaction.
  474. *
  475. * @return all of the source packs that fed into this compaction.
  476. */
  477. public Set<DfsPackDescription> getSourcePacks() {
  478. return toPrune();
  479. }
  480. /**
  481. * Get new packs created by this compaction.
  482. *
  483. * @return new packs created by this compaction.
  484. */
  485. public List<DfsPackDescription> getNewPacks() {
  486. return newPackDesc;
  487. }
  488. /**
  489. * Get statistics corresponding to the {@link #getNewPacks()}.
  490. * <p>
  491. * The elements can be null if the stat is not available for the pack file.
  492. *
  493. * @return statistics corresponding to the {@link #getNewPacks()}.
  494. */
  495. public List<PackStatistics> getNewPackStatistics() {
  496. return newPackStats;
  497. }
  498. private Set<DfsPackDescription> toPrune() {
  499. Set<DfsPackDescription> toPrune = new HashSet<>();
  500. for (DfsPackFile pack : packsBefore) {
  501. toPrune.add(pack.getPackDescription());
  502. }
  503. if (reftableConfig != null) {
  504. for (DfsReftable table : reftablesBefore) {
  505. toPrune.add(table.getPackDescription());
  506. }
  507. }
  508. for (DfsPackFile pack : expiredGarbagePacks) {
  509. toPrune.add(pack.getPackDescription());
  510. }
  511. return toPrune;
  512. }
  513. private void packHeads(ProgressMonitor pm) throws IOException {
  514. if (allHeadsAndTags.isEmpty()) {
  515. writeReftable();
  516. return;
  517. }
  518. try (PackWriter pw = newPackWriter()) {
  519. pw.setTagTargets(tagTargets);
  520. pw.preparePack(pm, allHeadsAndTags, NONE, NONE, allTags);
  521. if (0 < pw.getObjectCount()) {
  522. long estSize = estimateGcPackSize(INSERT, RECEIVE, COMPACT, GC);
  523. writePack(GC, pw, pm, estSize);
  524. } else {
  525. writeReftable();
  526. }
  527. }
  528. }
  529. private void packRest(ProgressMonitor pm) throws IOException {
  530. if (nonHeads.isEmpty())
  531. return;
  532. try (PackWriter pw = newPackWriter()) {
  533. for (ObjectIdSet packedObjs : newPackObj)
  534. pw.excludeObjects(packedObjs);
  535. pw.preparePack(pm, nonHeads, allHeadsAndTags);
  536. if (0 < pw.getObjectCount())
  537. writePack(GC_REST, pw, pm,
  538. estimateGcPackSize(INSERT, RECEIVE, COMPACT, GC_REST));
  539. }
  540. }
  541. private void packRefTreeGraph(ProgressMonitor pm) throws IOException {
  542. if (txnHeads.isEmpty())
  543. return;
  544. try (PackWriter pw = newPackWriter()) {
  545. for (ObjectIdSet packedObjs : newPackObj)
  546. pw.excludeObjects(packedObjs);
  547. pw.preparePack(pm, txnHeads, NONE);
  548. if (0 < pw.getObjectCount())
  549. writePack(GC_TXN, pw, pm, 0 /* unknown pack size */);
  550. }
  551. }
  552. private void packGarbage(ProgressMonitor pm) throws IOException {
  553. PackConfig cfg = new PackConfig(packConfig);
  554. cfg.setReuseDeltas(true);
  555. cfg.setReuseObjects(true);
  556. cfg.setDeltaCompress(false);
  557. cfg.setBuildBitmaps(false);
  558. try (PackWriter pw = new PackWriter(cfg, ctx);
  559. RevWalk pool = new RevWalk(ctx)) {
  560. pw.setDeltaBaseAsOffset(true);
  561. pw.setReuseDeltaCommits(true);
  562. pm.beginTask(JGitText.get().findingGarbage, objectsBefore());
  563. long estimatedPackSize = 12 + 20; // header and trailer sizes.
  564. for (DfsPackFile oldPack : packsBefore) {
  565. PackIndex oldIdx = oldPack.getPackIndex(ctx);
  566. PackReverseIndex oldRevIdx = oldPack.getReverseIdx(ctx);
  567. long maxOffset = oldPack.getPackDescription().getFileSize(PACK)
  568. - 20; // pack size - trailer size.
  569. for (PackIndex.MutableEntry ent : oldIdx) {
  570. pm.update(1);
  571. ObjectId id = ent.toObjectId();
  572. if (pool.lookupOrNull(id) != null || anyPackHas(id))
  573. continue;
  574. long offset = ent.getOffset();
  575. int type = oldPack.getObjectType(ctx, offset);
  576. pw.addObject(pool.lookupAny(id, type));
  577. long objSize = oldRevIdx.findNextOffset(offset, maxOffset)
  578. - offset;
  579. estimatedPackSize += objSize;
  580. }
  581. }
  582. pm.endTask();
  583. if (0 < pw.getObjectCount())
  584. writePack(UNREACHABLE_GARBAGE, pw, pm, estimatedPackSize);
  585. }
  586. }
  587. private boolean anyPackHas(AnyObjectId id) {
  588. for (ObjectIdSet packedObjs : newPackObj)
  589. if (packedObjs.contains(id))
  590. return true;
  591. return false;
  592. }
  593. private static boolean isHead(Ref ref) {
  594. return ref.getName().startsWith(Constants.R_HEADS);
  595. }
  596. private static boolean isTag(Ref ref) {
  597. return ref.getName().startsWith(Constants.R_TAGS);
  598. }
  599. private int objectsBefore() {
  600. int cnt = 0;
  601. for (DfsPackFile p : packsBefore)
  602. cnt += (int) p.getPackDescription().getObjectCount();
  603. return cnt;
  604. }
  605. private PackWriter newPackWriter() {
  606. PackWriter pw = new PackWriter(packConfig, ctx);
  607. pw.setDeltaBaseAsOffset(true);
  608. pw.setReuseDeltaCommits(false);
  609. return pw;
  610. }
  611. private long estimateGcPackSize(PackSource first, PackSource... rest) {
  612. EnumSet<PackSource> sourceSet = EnumSet.of(first, rest);
  613. // Every pack file contains 12 bytes of header and 20 bytes of trailer.
  614. // Include the final pack file header and trailer size here and ignore
  615. // the same from individual pack files.
  616. long size = 32;
  617. for (DfsPackDescription pack : getSourcePacks()) {
  618. if (sourceSet.contains(pack.getPackSource())) {
  619. size += pack.getFileSize(PACK) - 32;
  620. }
  621. }
  622. return size;
  623. }
  624. private DfsPackDescription writePack(PackSource source, PackWriter pw,
  625. ProgressMonitor pm, long estimatedPackSize) throws IOException {
  626. DfsPackDescription pack = repo.getObjectDatabase().newPack(source,
  627. estimatedPackSize);
  628. if (source == GC && reftableConfig != null) {
  629. writeReftable(pack);
  630. }
  631. try (DfsOutputStream out = objdb.writeFile(pack, PACK)) {
  632. pw.writePack(pm, pm, out);
  633. pack.addFileExt(PACK);
  634. pack.setBlockSize(PACK, out.blockSize());
  635. }
  636. try (DfsOutputStream out = objdb.writeFile(pack, INDEX)) {
  637. CountingOutputStream cnt = new CountingOutputStream(out);
  638. pw.writeIndex(cnt);
  639. pack.addFileExt(INDEX);
  640. pack.setFileSize(INDEX, cnt.getCount());
  641. pack.setBlockSize(INDEX, out.blockSize());
  642. pack.setIndexVersion(pw.getIndexVersion());
  643. }
  644. if (pw.prepareBitmapIndex(pm)) {
  645. try (DfsOutputStream out = objdb.writeFile(pack, BITMAP_INDEX)) {
  646. CountingOutputStream cnt = new CountingOutputStream(out);
  647. pw.writeBitmapIndex(cnt);
  648. pack.addFileExt(BITMAP_INDEX);
  649. pack.setFileSize(BITMAP_INDEX, cnt.getCount());
  650. pack.setBlockSize(BITMAP_INDEX, out.blockSize());
  651. }
  652. }
  653. PackStatistics stats = pw.getStatistics();
  654. pack.setPackStats(stats);
  655. pack.setLastModified(startTimeMillis);
  656. newPackDesc.add(pack);
  657. newPackStats.add(stats);
  658. newPackObj.add(pw.getObjectSet());
  659. return pack;
  660. }
  661. private void writeReftable() throws IOException {
  662. if (reftableConfig != null) {
  663. DfsPackDescription pack = objdb.newPack(GC);
  664. newPackDesc.add(pack);
  665. newPackStats.add(null);
  666. writeReftable(pack);
  667. }
  668. }
  669. private void writeReftable(DfsPackDescription pack) throws IOException {
  670. if (convertToReftable && !hasGcReftable()) {
  671. writeReftable(pack, refsBefore);
  672. return;
  673. }
  674. try (ReftableStack stack = ReftableStack.open(ctx, reftablesBefore)) {
  675. ReftableCompactor compact = new ReftableCompactor();
  676. compact.addAll(stack.readers());
  677. compact.setIncludeDeletes(includeDeletes);
  678. compactReftable(pack, compact);
  679. }
  680. }
  681. private boolean hasGcReftable() {
  682. for (DfsReftable table : reftablesBefore) {
  683. if (table.getPackDescription().getPackSource() == GC) {
  684. return true;
  685. }
  686. }
  687. return false;
  688. }
  689. private void writeReftable(DfsPackDescription pack, Collection<Ref> refs)
  690. throws IOException {
  691. try (DfsOutputStream out = objdb.writeFile(pack, REFTABLE)) {
  692. ReftableConfig cfg = configureReftable(reftableConfig, out);
  693. ReftableWriter writer = new ReftableWriter(cfg)
  694. .setMinUpdateIndex(reftableInitialMinUpdateIndex)
  695. .setMaxUpdateIndex(reftableInitialMaxUpdateIndex)
  696. .begin(out)
  697. .sortAndWriteRefs(refs)
  698. .finish();
  699. pack.addFileExt(REFTABLE);
  700. pack.setReftableStats(writer.getStats());
  701. }
  702. }
  703. private void compactReftable(DfsPackDescription pack,
  704. ReftableCompactor compact) throws IOException {
  705. try (DfsOutputStream out = objdb.writeFile(pack, REFTABLE)) {
  706. compact.setConfig(configureReftable(reftableConfig, out));
  707. compact.compact(out);
  708. pack.addFileExt(REFTABLE);
  709. pack.setReftableStats(compact.getStats());
  710. }
  711. }
  712. }