This changes the files table to use normalisation for the names and
versions. The idea is that these are often common between all remote
devices, and repeating an integer is more efficient than repeating a
long string. A new benchmark bears this out; for a database with 100k
files shared between 31 devices, with some worst case assumption on
version vector size, the database is reduced in size by 50% and the test
finishes quicker:
Current:
db_bench_test.go:322: Total size: 6263.70 MiB
--- PASS: TestBenchmarkSizeManyFilesRemotes (1084.89s)
New:
db_bench_test.go:326: Total size: 3049.95 MiB
--- PASS: TestBenchmarkSizeManyFilesRemotes (776.97s)
The other benchmarks end up about the same within the margin of
variability, with one possible exception being that RemoteNeed seems to
be a little slower on average:
old files/s new files/s
Update/n=RemoteNeed/size=1000-8 5.051k 4.654k
Update/n=RemoteNeed/size=2000-8 5.201k 4.384k
Update/n=RemoteNeed/size=4000-8 4.943k 4.242k
Update/n=RemoteNeed/size=8000-8 5.099k 3.527k
Update/n=RemoteNeed/size=16000-8 3.686k 3.847k
Update/n=RemoteNeed/size=30000-8 4.456k 3.482k
I'm not sure why, possibly that query can be optimised anyhow.
Signed-off-by: Jakob Borg <jakob@kastelo.net>
I'm working through linter complaints, these are some fixes. Broad
categories:
1) Ignore errors where we can ignore errors: add "_ = ..." construct.
you can argue that this is annoying noise, but apart from silencing the
linter it *does* serve the purpose of highlighting that an error is
being ignored. I think this is OK, because the linter highlighted some
error cases I wasn't aware of (starting CPU profiles, for example).
2) Untyped constants where we though we had set the type.
3) A real bug where we ineffectually assigned to a shadowed err.
4) Some dead code removed.
There'll be more of these, because not all packages are fixed, but the
diff was already large enough.
Integers are for numbers, enabling arithmetic like subtractions and for
loops without getting shot in the foot. Unsigneds are for bitfields.
- "int" for numbers that will always be laughably smaller than four
billion, and where we don't care about the serialization format.
- "int32" for numbers that will always be laughably smaller than four
billion, and will be serialized to four bytes.
- "int64" for numbers that may approach four billion or will be
serialized to eight bytes.
- "uint32" and "uint64" for bitfields, depending on required number of
bits and serialization format. Likewise "uint8" and "uint16", although
rare in this project since they don't exist in XDR.
- "int8", "int16" and plain "uint" are almost never useful.
Jakob Borg
Jakob Borg