[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26105?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Yutong Xiao updated HBASE-26105:
--------------------------------
Comment: was deleted
(was: While L1 may have victim handler, if just getBlock on L1, it may cache
back the block from L2, that means one block exist both in L1, L2. )
> Rectify the expired TODO comment in CombinedBC
> ----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-26105
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26105
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: BlockCache
> Reporter: Yutong Xiao
> Assignee: Yutong Xiao
> Priority: Trivial
>
> In the method getBlock in CombinedBC, there is a TODO comment as follows:
> {code:java}
> @Override
> public Cacheable getBlock(BlockCacheKey cacheKey, boolean caching,
> boolean repeat, boolean updateCacheMetrics) {
> // TODO: is there a hole here, or just awkwardness since in the lruCache
> getBlock
> // we end up calling l2Cache.getBlock.
> // We are not in a position to exactly look at LRU cache or BC as
> BlockType may not be getting
> // passed always.
> boolean existInL1 = l1Cache.containsBlock(cacheKey);
> if (!existInL1 && updateCacheMetrics && !repeat) {
> // If the block does not exist in L1, the containsBlock should be
> counted as one miss.
> l1Cache.getStats().miss(caching, cacheKey.isPrimary(),
> cacheKey.getBlockType());
> }
> return existInL1 ?
> l1Cache.getBlock(cacheKey, caching, repeat, updateCacheMetrics):
> l2Cache.getBlock(cacheKey, caching, repeat, updateCacheMetrics);
> }
> {code}
> The TODO comment is expired. While in CombinedBC, L2 is not the victim
> handler of L1.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
