Skip to content
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

Implement Size() measuring size estimation for execution cache #6681

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

timl3136
Copy link
Member

What changed?
Implement Size() measuring size estimation for execution cache, add empty size estimation function for mutableState and shardContext

Why?
We want to modernize existing cadence common cache implement to a bytes-based system. That means we need to have a method to measure each entry (which is currently accepting any generic interface). We found the "Reflect" package provides a measuring function but runtime is too slow to be used in cache operations. Therefore, we will require all usages to implement the Size() function in their cache logic if they want to migrate to the new bytes-based system.

In order to seamless transition from the current cache system with an entry-based model, the implementation and rollout will be done in following phases:

  1. Define the Sizeable interface
  2. Implement Sizeable for cadence-history service
    a. Implement Size() for ExecutionCache <-- This PR
    b. Implement Size() for EventCache
  3. Implement bytes-based cache system
  4. Enable new cache system for usage in cadence-history service
  5. Implement and enable new cache system for the remaining usages

How did you test it?
Unit tests

Potential risks
No risk since this PR only adds read-only function that is not used.

Release notes

Documentation Changes

…mpty size estimation function for mutableState and shardContext
@@ -236,5 +236,7 @@ type (

GetHistorySize() int64
SetHistorySize(size int64)

GetEstimatedMutableStateSize() int
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not sure if you have a Size interface somewhere, but would it make more sense for using that?

The thing about creating an interface for Size() int is that it'll allow whatever caches that need to take inputs can just require the interface, rather than any specific concrete types?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That makes sense, I will change the naming to Size(). Thanks.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants