-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 328
perf(storage): reduce multipart upload copying #2863
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
ValentaTomas
wants to merge
7
commits into
main
Choose a base branch
from
valenta/storage-upload-copy-reduction
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and old review comments may become outdated.
+82
−34
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
7 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
5b4ac53
perf(storage): reduce multipart upload copying
ValentaTomas 0e50460
fix(storage): satisfy upload lint checks
ValentaTomas ef2d92f
fix(storage): satisfy multipart reader and lint contracts
ValentaTomas 616cf63
perf(storage): release frame input buffers per goroutine (#2869)
levb d61ad6d
perf(storage): share frame input buffer pool across uploads
ValentaTomas f2cf613
test(storage): remove temporary pool lifecycle demo
ValentaTomas 13a9043
fix(storage): keep multipart part checksums
ValentaTomas 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
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.
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.
lets not access the inputBufPool from here at all - keep the responsibility to the place where gets are happening. Keeping get - put together
If we need to do async callback, lets do that instead, or move the goroutine schedule to the
readLoopfunction (if possible)This comment was marked as outdated.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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'm not sure if wrapping in callback make sense. This is fundamentally just a
freefor the memory, if we don't call it and because we need it to be async putting the callback there does not feel like it clears up the lifecycle. It is the same method, but not it is also closured.Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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 goal is to keep the Get/Put combination next to each other - in one place. That way it's possible to validate the buffer free when it's stopped being used.
Now its across two functions which makes it difficult to track