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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
feat: Use WAL Manager #13491
feat: Use WAL Manager #13491
Changes from 2 commits
40e5930
f849be6
fa860f1
f9d6c4e
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
Check failure on line 123 in pkg/ingester-rf1/flush.go
GitHub Actions / check / golangciLint
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 think we could remove the err return from NextPending if we don't look at it?
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 think so too, I'll do it for both
NextPending
andPut
in another PR. 👍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.
It might be more performant to use a pointer for Append here -
unsafe.Sizeof
says the AppendRequest is 80B and since it's passed by value it gets copied into the function call.I'm not sure if this actually leads to any performance benefit in this case but might be worth a benchmark since it's called so often?
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.
A lot of the time
&wal.AppendRequest{}
will be turned intowal.AppendRequest{}
at compile-time as it's faster to do this copy on the stack instead of allocate it on the heap. It's easier to show with an isolated example.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.
Benchmark for using the stack:
Benchmark for using the heap: