ksnavely commented on a change in pull request #754: Compactor optimization -
PR FOR FEEDBACK ONLY
URL: https://github.com/apache/couchdb/pull/754#discussion_r133541752
##########
File path: src/couch/src/couch_db_updater.erl
##########
@@ -1034,56 +1041,90 @@ check_md5(_, _) -> throw(md5_mismatch).
start_copy_compact(#db{}=Db) ->
erlang:put(io_priority, {db_compact, Db#db.name}),
- #db{name=Name, filepath=Filepath, options=Options, header=Header} = Db,
- couch_log:debug("Compaction process spawned for db \"~s\"", [Name]),
+ couch_log:debug("Compaction process spawned for db \"~s\"", [Db#db.name]),
+
+ {ok, InitCompSt} = open_compaction_files(Db),
+
+ Stages = [
+ fun copy_purge_info/1,
+ fun copy_compact/1,
+ fun commit_compaction_data/1,
+ fun sort_meta_data/1,
+ fun commit_compaction_data/1,
+ fun copy_meta_data/1,
+ fun compact_final_sync/1
+ ],
- {ok, NewDb, DName, DFd, MFd, Retry} =
- open_compaction_files(Name, Header, Filepath, Options),
- erlang:monitor(process, MFd),
+ FinalCompSt = lists:foldl(fun(Stage, CompSt) ->
+ Stage(CompSt)
+ end, InitCompSt, Stages),
- % This is a bit worrisome. init_db/4 will monitor the data fd
- % but it doesn't know about the meta fd. For now I'll maintain
- % that the data fd is the old normal fd and meta fd is special
- % and hope everything works out for the best.
Review comment:
Is the concern over the lack of a monitor on the meta file descriptor still
valid? Or is it moot with the `couch_file:close(MetaFd)` call now?
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
With regards,
Apache Git Services
