-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 139
CBG-4605: dcp mode for caching tool #7483
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
gregns1
wants to merge
5
commits into
main
Choose a base branch
from
CBG-4605
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+529
−27
Open
Changes from 4 commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
86542a1
CBG-4605: dcp mode for caching tool
gregns1 13603b1
remove unused dependecy and rmeove test
gregns1 5164c0b
updates on functionality of tool, channel cache init + change waiter …
gregns1 f425a04
updates off comments
gregns1 be9929a
refactor DCP client creation + make vBuckets and workers configurable
gregns1 File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What's the purpose of this separate constructor? If this is only to support a separate number of vbuckets, then I'd just create a
newDCPClientWithVbucketCount()
and have all the common data there.I'm not sure that this code is going to be sensitive to the number of vbuckets, but presumably the number of workers?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The idea of having this separate constructor was to avoid the call to
GetMaxVbNo
insideNewDCPClient
given this test isn't using real world bucket in server this call would fail so needed to be able top construct the DCP client without actually it being in anyway connected to server.I thought about passing in a flag to
NewDCPClient
to get around this but thought against changing any functions like that just for a test tool.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I was just thinking of making the extra option to the constructor private:
I actually feel more strongly about a refactor of this type since the test function actually omits the ability to tune num workers and so has already deviated from the behavior of the non test function. We aren't tuning this number but this can actually also be a source of bottlenecks and something that could be tested.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah I see now will push update to carry this out