Summary:
This allows versions that don't know about storerequirements still access newly
created repos with this version. We will turn this on at a later date.
Reviewed By: singhsrb
Differential Revision: D10033964
fbshipit-source-id: e1065e05c33544d0287eda5eb852baff07c13147
Summary:
Add the `storerequirements` feature to the repo. This means the store may have
a `requires` file, and clients must check it for any store features that they
may be missing. This allows new requirements to be added that affect the store
when the repo is shared. Currently there are no store features.
This commit adds support for the feature, and only new repos have the
requirement added. A future commit will optimistically upgrade repos to
include the requirement.
Reviewed By: quark-zju
Differential Revision: D9699156
fbshipit-source-id: 95c1ab6973d44c02abc69b78a15311fe6a8696fd
Summary:
Enable it by default so all tests run with it.
The test changes are mostly caused by repo requirement changes.
Reviewed By: DurhamG
Differential Revision: D8880991
fbshipit-source-id: f96cecfd85b8088098c3b55d06ab0374ee93437b
Summary:
Previously it is not actually used.
`test-hgext-repogenerator.t` changed because treedirstate uses random
number to generate file names.
`fakedirstatewritetime.py` was updated to be treedirstate-aware. This
makes test-revert.t test-merge-tools.t test-merge1.t pass.
Reviewed By: singhsrb
Differential Revision: D7844960
fbshipit-source-id: 33a1d0d4a8e22ea5e6bb6454956884571fcf6bab
The final part of integrating the compression manager APIs into
revlog storage is the plumbing for repositories to advertise they
are using non-zlib storage and for revlogs to instantiate a non-zlib
compression engine.
The main intent of the compression manager work was to zstd all
of the things. Adding zstd to revlogs has proved to be more involved
than other places because revlogs are... special. Very small inputs
and the use of delta chains (which are themselves a form of
compression) are a completely different use case from streaming
compression, which bundles and the wire protocol employ. I've
conducted numerous experiments with zstd in revlogs and have yet
to formalize compression settings and a storage architecture that
I'm confident I won't regret later. In other words, I'm not yet
ready to commit to a new mechanism for using zstd - or any other
compression format - in revlogs.
That being said, having some support for zstd (and other compression
formats) in revlogs in core is beneficial. It can allow others to
conduct experiments.
This patch introduces *highly experimental* support for non-zlib
compression formats in revlogs. Introduced is a config option to
control which compression engine to use. Also introduced is a namespace
of "exp-compression-*" requirements to denote support for non-zlib
compression in revlogs. I've prefixed the namespace with "exp-"
(short for "experimental") because I'm not confident of the
requirements "schema" and in no way want to give the illusion of
supporting these requirements in the future. I fully intend to drop
support for these requirements once we figure out what we're doing
with zstd in revlogs.
A good portion of the patch is teaching the requirements system
about registered compression engines and passing the requested
compression engine as an opener option so revlogs can instantiate
the proper compression engine for new operations.
That's a verbose way of saying "we can now use zstd in revlogs!"
On an `hg pull` conversion of the mozilla-unified repo with no extra
redelta settings (like aggressivemergedeltas), we can see the impact
of zstd vs zlib in revlogs:
$ hg perfrevlogchunks -c
! chunk
! wall 2.032052 comb 2.040000 user 1.990000 sys 0.050000 (best of 5)
! wall 1.866360 comb 1.860000 user 1.820000 sys 0.040000 (best of 6)
! chunk batch
! wall 1.877261 comb 1.870000 user 1.860000 sys 0.010000 (best of 6)
! wall 1.705410 comb 1.710000 user 1.690000 sys 0.020000 (best of 6)
$ hg perfrevlogchunks -m
! chunk
! wall 2.721427 comb 2.720000 user 2.640000 sys 0.080000 (best of 4)
! wall 2.035076 comb 2.030000 user 1.950000 sys 0.080000 (best of 5)
! chunk batch
! wall 2.614561 comb 2.620000 user 2.580000 sys 0.040000 (best of 4)
! wall 1.910252 comb 1.910000 user 1.880000 sys 0.030000 (best of 6)
$ hg perfrevlog -c -d 1
! wall 4.812885 comb 4.820000 user 4.800000 sys 0.020000 (best of 3)
! wall 4.699621 comb 4.710000 user 4.700000 sys 0.010000 (best of 3)
$ hg perfrevlog -m -d 1000
! wall 34.252800 comb 34.250000 user 33.730000 sys 0.520000 (best of 3)
! wall 24.094999 comb 24.090000 user 23.320000 sys 0.770000 (best of 3)
Only modest wins for the changelog. But manifest reading is
significantly faster. What's going on?
One reason might be data volume. zstd decompresses faster. So given
more bytes, it will put more distance between it and zlib.
Another reason is size. In the current design, zstd revlogs are
*larger*:
debugcreatestreamclonebundle (size in bytes)
zlib: 1,638,852,492
zstd: 1,680,601,332
I haven't investigated this fully, but I reckon a significant cause of
larger revlogs is that the zstd frame/header has more bytes than
zlib's. For very small inputs or data that doesn't compress well, we'll
tend to store more uncompressed chunks than with zlib (because the
compressed size isn't smaller than original). This will make revlog
reading faster because it is doing less decompression.
Moving on to bundle performance:
$ hg bundle -a -t none-v2 (total CPU time)
zlib: 102.79s
zstd: 97.75s
So, marginal CPU decrease for reading all chunks in all revlogs
(this is somewhat disappointing).
$ hg bundle -a -t <engine>-v2 (total CPU time)
zlib: 191.59s
zstd: 115.36s
This last test effectively measures the difference between zlib->zlib
and zstd->zstd for revlogs to bundle. This is a rough approximation of
what a server does during `hg clone`.
There are some promising results for zstd. But not enough for me to
feel comfortable advertising it to users. We'll get there...
