If all the samples are deleted for a series,
we should still keep the series in the WAL as
anything else reading the WAL will still care
about it in order to understand the samples.
Signed-off-by: Brian Brazil <brian.brazil@robustperception.io>
* Add unittests for PostingsForMatcher.
* Selector methods are all stateless, don't need a reference.
* Be smarter in how we look at matchers.
Look at all matchers to see if a label can be empty.
Optimise Not handling, so i!="2" is a simple lookup
rather than an inverse postings list.
All all the Withouts together, rather than
having to subtract each from all postings.
Change the pre-expand the postings logic to always do it before doing a
Without only. Don't do that if it's already a list.
The initial goal here was that the oft-seen pattern
i=~"something.+",i!="foo",i!="bar" becomes more efficient.
benchmark old ns/op new ns/op delta
BenchmarkHeadPostingForMatchers/n="1"-4 5888 6160 +4.62%
BenchmarkHeadPostingForMatchers/n="1",j="foo"-4 7190 6640 -7.65%
BenchmarkHeadPostingForMatchers/j="foo",n="1"-4 6038 5923 -1.90%
BenchmarkHeadPostingForMatchers/n="1",j!="foo"-4 6030884 4850525 -19.57%
BenchmarkHeadPostingForMatchers/i=~".*"-4 887377940 230329137 -74.04%
BenchmarkHeadPostingForMatchers/i=~".+"-4 490316101 319931758 -34.75%
BenchmarkHeadPostingForMatchers/i=~""-4 594961991 130279313 -78.10%
BenchmarkHeadPostingForMatchers/i!=""-4 537542388 318751015 -40.70%
BenchmarkHeadPostingForMatchers/n="1",i=~".*",j="foo"-4 10460243 8565195 -18.12%
BenchmarkHeadPostingForMatchers/n="1",i=~".*",i!="2",j="foo"-4 44964267 8561546 -80.96%
BenchmarkHeadPostingForMatchers/n="1",i!="",j="foo"-4 42244885 29137737 -31.03%
BenchmarkHeadPostingForMatchers/n="1",i=~".+",j="foo"-4 35285834 32774584 -7.12%
BenchmarkHeadPostingForMatchers/n="1",i=~"1.+",j="foo"-4 8951047 8379024 -6.39%
BenchmarkHeadPostingForMatchers/n="1",i=~".+",i!="2",j="foo"-4 63813335 30672688 -51.93%
BenchmarkHeadPostingForMatchers/n="1",i=~".+",i!~"2.*",j="foo"-4 45381112 44924397 -1.01%
Signed-off-by: Brian Brazil <brian.brazil@robustperception.io>
since golang 1.12 no special handling is required for file.Sync()
@pborzenkov thanks for the pointer.
Signed-off-by: Krasi Georgiev <kgeorgie@redhat.com>
Testing that createBlock creates blocks that can be opened.
and checking the os.RemoveAll for errors will catch errors for un-closed files under windows.
Many missing .Close() calls were added for fixing failing os.RemoveAll
Signed-off-by: Krasi Georgiev <kgeorgie@redhat.com>
`if ds[i].meta.MinTime < t0 || ds[i].meta.MaxTime > t0+tr `, ds[i].meta.MinTime is always larger or equal to t0, so no need for this check.
`ulid.Parse` only checks if the length is 26. So changed to using `ulid.ParseStrict` to also check the validity of ulid.
Use a heap for Next for merges, and
pre-compute if there's many postings on the
unset path.
Add posting lookup benchmarks
Signed-off-by: Brian Brazil <brian.brazil@robustperception.io>
If the corrupt segment is full, then we set donePages on open,
c59ed492b2/wal/wal.go (L235-L243)
Then when we try to repair, we set the segment to be a new segment but
we don't update the donePages: c59ed492b2/wal/wal.go (L334)
We we try to log to this, because donePages is full, we will never log
anything to this segment and create a new one: c59ed492b2/wal/wal.go (L486)
This does not cause issues because we simply concatenate the segments on
read, there by transparently skipping this `0b` segment.
Make WAL live tailer return EOF when the there is a half-written record at the end of the file.
Previously, this would cause an infinite loop as we ignored EOFs when filling the buffer. We now differentiate between EOFs that read >0 bytes, and EOFs that didn't.
Add some more unit tests for tailing a corrupt WAL, and unify interfaces Reader and LiveReader for the purposes of testing.
Signed-off-by: Tom Wilkie <tom.wilkie@gmail.com>
Test to corrupt segments mid-WAL, repair and check we can read the correct number of records.
Make segmentBufReader pad short segments with zeros, and only advance curr segment index after fully reading segment.
