Wiser coders than myself have come to the conclusion that a `switch`
statement is almost always superior to a statement that includes any
`else if`.
The exceptions that I have found in our codebase are just these two:
* The `if else` is followed by an additional statement before the next
condition (separated by a `;`).
* The whole thing is within a `for` loop and `break` statements are
used. In this case, using `switch` would require tagging the `for`
loop, which probably tips the balance.
Why are `switch` statements more readable?
For one, fewer curly braces. But more importantly, the conditions all
have the same alignment, so the whole thing follows the natural flow
of going down a list of conditions. With `else if`, in contrast, all
conditions but the first are "hidden" behind `} else if `, harder to
spot and (for no good reason) presented differently from the first
condition.
I'm sure the aforemention wise coders can list even more reasons.
In any case, I like it so much that I have found myself recommending
it in code reviews. I would like to make it a habit in our code base,
without making it a hard requirement that we would test on the CI. But
for that, there has to be a role model, so this commit eliminates all
`if else` occurrences, unless it is autogenerated code or fits one of
the exceptions above.
Signed-off-by: beorn7 <beorn@grafana.com>
We haven't updated golint-ci in our CI yet, but this commit prepares
for that.
There are a lot of new warnings, and it is mostly because the "revive"
linter got updated. I agree with most of the new warnings, mostly
around not naming unused function parameters (although it is justified
in some cases for documentation purposes – while things like mocks are
a good example where not naming the parameter is clearer).
I'm pretty upset about the "empty block" warning to include `for`
loops. It's such a common pattern to do something in the head of the
`for` loop and then have an empty block. There is still an open issue
about this: https://github.com/mgechev/revive/issues/810 I have
disabled "revive" altogether in files where empty blocks are used
excessively, and I have made the effort to add individual
`// nolint:revive` where empty blocks are used just once or twice.
It's borderline noisy, though, but let's go with it for now.
I should mention that none of the "empty block" warnings for `for`
loop bodies were legitimate.
Signed-off-by: beorn7 <beorn@grafana.com>
* Limit FastRegexMatcher by size (bytes) and add a TTL to each entry
Signed-off-by: Marco Pracucci <marco@pracucci.com>
* Add TestNewFastRegexMatcher_CacheSizeLimit
Signed-off-by: Marco Pracucci <marco@pracucci.com>
* Tolerate ristretto goroutines when checking goroutine leaks
Signed-off-by: Marco Pracucci <marco@pracucci.com>
* Tolerate ristretto goroutines when checking goroutine leaks
Signed-off-by: Marco Pracucci <marco@pracucci.com>
---------
Signed-off-by: Marco Pracucci <marco@pracucci.com>
In the past, every sample value was a float, so it was fine to call a
variable holding such a float "value" or "sample". With native
histograms, a sample might have a histogram value. And a histogram
value is still a value. Calling a float value just "value" or "sample"
or "V" is therefore misleading. Over the last few commits, I already
renamed many variables, but this cleans up a few more places where the
changes are more invasive.
Note that we do not to attempt naming in the JSON APIs or in the
protobufs. That would be quite a disruption. However, internally, we
can call variables as we want, and we should go with the option of
avoiding misunderstandings.
Signed-off-by: beorn7 <beorn@grafana.com>
Previously, we had one “polymorphous” `sample` type in the `storage`
package. This commit breaks it up into `fSample`, `hSample`, and
`fhSample`, each still implementing the `tsdbutil.Sample` interface.
This reduces allocations in `sampleRing.Add` but inflicts the penalty
of the interface wrapper, which makes things worse in total.
This commit therefore just demonstrates the step taken. The next
commit will tackle the interface overhead problem.
Signed-off-by: beorn7 <beorn@grafana.com>
It seems that readOnlyDB was still opened which blocked the temp dir
cleanup.
Also changed the copy dir to be another TempDir instead of manually
creating one.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Zaytsev <mail@olegzaytsev.com>
* Use zeropool.Pool to workaround SA6002
I built a tiny library called https://github.com/colega/zeropool to
workaround the SA6002 staticheck issue.
While searching for the references of that SA6002 staticheck issues on
Github first results was Prometheus itself, with quite a lot of ignores
of it.
This changes the usages of `sync.Pool` to `zeropool.Pool[T]` where a
pointer is not available.
Also added a benchmark for HeadAppender Append/Commit when series
already exist, which is one of the most usual cases IMO, as I didn't find
any.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Zaytsev <mail@olegzaytsev.com>
* Improve BenchmarkHeadAppender with more cases
Signed-off-by: Oleg Zaytsev <mail@olegzaytsev.com>
* A little copying is better than a little dependency
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PAAkCSZUG1c&t=9m28s
Signed-off-by: Oleg Zaytsev <mail@olegzaytsev.com>
* Fix imports order
Signed-off-by: Oleg Zaytsev <mail@olegzaytsev.com>
* Add license header
Signed-off-by: Oleg Zaytsev <mail@olegzaytsev.com>
* Copyright should be on one of the first 3 lines
Signed-off-by: Oleg Zaytsev <mail@olegzaytsev.com>
* Use require.Equal for testing
I don't depend on testify in my lib, but here we have it available.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Zaytsev <mail@olegzaytsev.com>
* Avoid flaky test
Signed-off-by: Oleg Zaytsev <mail@olegzaytsev.com>
* Also use zeropool for pointsPool in engine.go
Signed-off-by: Oleg Zaytsev <mail@olegzaytsev.com>
---------
Signed-off-by: Oleg Zaytsev <mail@olegzaytsev.com>
We need to make sure that `tsdb_errors.NewMulti` handles the errors.Is()
calls properly, like it's done in grafana/dskit.
Also we need to check that `errors.Is(err, context.Canceled)`, not that
`err == context.Canceled`.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Zaytsev <mail@olegzaytsev.com>
Test that blocks are not marked as "compaction failed" during shutdown.
This shouldn't happen but this test currently fails.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Zaytsev <mail@olegzaytsev.com>
We need to make sure that `tsdb_errors.NewMulti` handles the errors.Is()
calls properly, like it's done in grafana/dskit.
Also we need to check that `errors.Is(err, context.Canceled)`, not that
`err == context.Canceled`.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Zaytsev <mail@olegzaytsev.com>
Test that blocks are not marked as "compaction failed" during shutdown.
This shouldn't happen but this test currently fails.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Zaytsev <mail@olegzaytsev.com>
It took a `Labels` where the memory could be re-used, but in practice
this hardly ever benefitted. Especially after converting `relabel.Process`
to `relabel.ProcessBuilder`.
Comparing the parameter to `nil` was a bug; `EmptyLabels` is not `nil`
so the slice was reallocated multiple times by `append`.
Lastly `Builder.Labels()` now estimates that the final size will depend
on labels added and deleted.
Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com>
We need to be able to identify the errors that a multierror wraps.
Especially in case of `context.Canceled`. This is the same
implementation of that method as we do in github.com/grafana/dskit/multierror
Signed-off-by: Oleg Zaytsev <mail@olegzaytsev.com>
