[ 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)