[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: Question regarding MDB_NOLOCK

David Barbour wrote:

Okay, I think I see what's happening here:

mdb_find_oldest(): will return the most recent snapshot if no readers exist

mdb_page_alloc(): will search FREE_DBI for a transaction `last` that is
less than oldest, and will try to find a contiguous range of pages that
were free'd by said transaction, potentially merging free pages from
many transactions. If nothing is found, will instead grow the database.

Since `last` < `oldest` when we reuse any old pages, and we're only
using the 'freed' pages from last (not the data pages), we know that at
the data pages for the eldest two transactions are protected.

Is this right?


My earlier assumption (before reading mdb_page_alloc) was that LMDB
would be aggressive about grabbing pages freed by transactions that are
not actively being read. If we're relying on `last < oldest` to create a
two page discrepancy, this means when we actually have readers on older
transactions that we're being little more conservative than necessary.

More than necessary? I don't think so.

But it does protect the last two snapshots.

Yes, always.

  -- Howard Chu
  CTO, Symas Corp.           http://www.symas.com
  Director, Highland Sun     http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
  Chief Architect, OpenLDAP  http://www.openldap.org/project/