jgit.storage.dht is a storage provider implementation for JGit that
permits storing the Git repository in a distributed hashtable, NoSQL
system, or other database. The actual underlying storage system is
undefined, and can be plugged in by implementing 7 small interfaces:
* Database
* RepositoryIndexTable
* RepositoryTable
* RefTable
* ChunkTable
* ObjectIndexTable
* WriteBuffer
The storage provider interface tries to assume very little about the
underlying storage system, and requires only three key features:
* key -> value lookup (a hashtable is suitable)
* atomic updates on single rows
* asynchronous operations (Java's ExecutorService is easy to use)
Most NoSQL database products offer all 3 of these features in their
clients, and so does any decent network based cache system like the
open source memcache product. Relying only on key equality for data
retrevial makes it simple for the storage engine to distribute across
multiple machines. Traditional SQL systems could also be used with a
JDBC based spi implementation.
Before submitting this change I have implemented six storage systems
for the spi layer:
* Apache HBase[1]
* Apache Cassandra[2]
* Google Bigtable[3]
* an in-memory implementation for unit testing
* a JDBC implementation for SQL
* a generic cache provider that can ride on top of memcache
All six systems came in with an spi layer around 1000 lines of code to
implement the above 7 interfaces. This is a huge reduction in size
compared to prior attempts to implement a new JGit storage layer. As
this package shows, a complete JGit storage implementation is more
than 17,000 lines of fairly complex code.
A simple cache is provided in storage.dht.spi.cache. Implementers can
use CacheDatabase to wrap any other type of Database and perform fast
reads against a network based cache service, such as the open source
memcached[4]. An implementation of CacheService must be provided to
glue this spi onto the network cache.
[1] https://github.com/spearce/jgit_hbase
[2] https://github.com/spearce/jgit_cassandra
[3] http://labs.google.com/papers/bigtable.html
[4] http://memcached.org/
Change-Id: I0aa4072781f5ccc019ca421c036adff2c40c4295
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
There is no point in pushing all of the files within the edge
commits into the delta search when making a thin pack. This floods
the delta search window with objects that are unlikely to be useful
bases for the objects that will be written out, resulting in lower
data compression and higher transfer sizes.
Instead observe the path of a tree or blob that is being pushed
into the outgoing set, and use that path to locate up to WINDOW
ancestor versions from the edge commits. Push only those objects
into the edgeObjects set, reducing the number of objects seen by the
search window. This allows PackWriter to only look at ancestors
for the modified files, rather than all files in the project.
Limiting the search to WINDOW size makes sense, because more than
WINDOW edge objects will just skip through the window search as
none of them need to be delta compressed.
To further improve compression, sort edge objects into the front
of the window list, rather than randomly throughout. This puts
non-edges later in the window and gives them a better chance at
finding their base, since they search backwards through the window.
These changes make a significant difference in the thin-pack:
Before:
remote: Counting objects: 144190, done
remote: Finding sources: 100% (50275/50275)
remote: Getting sizes: 100% (101405/101405)
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (7587/7587)
Receiving objects: 100% (50275/50275), 24.67 MiB | 9.90 MiB/s, done.
Resolving deltas: 100% (40339/40339), completed with 2218 local objects.
real 0m30.267s
After:
remote: Counting objects: 61549, done
remote: Finding sources: 100% (50275/50275)
remote: Getting sizes: 100% (18862/18862)
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (7588/7588)
Receiving objects: 100% (50275/50275), 11.04 MiB | 3.51 MiB/s, done.
Resolving deltas: 100% (43160/43160), completed with 5014 local objects.
real 0m22.170s
The resulting pack is 13.63 MiB smaller, even though it contains the
same exact objects. 82,543 fewer objects had to have their sizes
looked up, which saved about 8s of server CPU time. 2,796 more
objects from the client were used as part of the base object set,
which contributed to the smaller transfer size.
Change-Id: Id01271950432c6960897495b09deab70e33993a9
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Sigend-off-by: Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@gmail.com>
Per CQ 3448 this is the initial contribution of the JGit project
to eclipse.org. It is derived from the historical JGit repository
at commit 3a2dd9921c.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>