duongkame commented on PR #3673: URL: https://github.com/apache/ozone/pull/3673#issuecomment-1281374561
> Hey @duongkame , thanks for working on the RocksDB object clean close thing. This patch looks like changed one function of Ozone DN, sharing LRU cache between different RocksDB instances. Here is the object list dumped from one DN. We can see there are LRUCache objects, as many as RocksDB instances. > >  Hi @ChenSammi , Thanks for identifying a potential issue.I can confirm that the behavior changed to have a new configuration (that includes LRU cache) per database instance to make resource management easy (so the config/cache can be closed gracefully with the database), [ref](https://github.com/apache/ozone/pull/3673/files#diff-125b90177e010785e46a63a53312e4fdf4a227715cd5e8bf4597457174d0fc95L109).I wasn't aware that there's a real need to share LRU cache between RocksDB. In light of the container DB merge, can you advise if we still need to share an LRU cache instance between RockDBs? Once confirmed, I'll file a Jira and correct the behavior. cc. @kerneltime @szetszwo -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
