Proposal: using shared_mutex instead of mutex for DeltaTree
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- C++
- Stars
- 1k
- Forks
- 423
- Avg merge
- 1d 15h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 24
Description
Enhancement
Currently, in DeltaTree, we use std::mutex in many places. Like the ColumnFile::Cache::mutex, DeltaValueSpace::mutex, DeltaIndex::mutex , etc. Since for TiFlash, the updates are applied in batch, maybe using shared_mutex can eliminate the conflicts between reads, and provide better performance
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by surveying the DeltaTree uses of std::mutex, including ColumnFile::Cache::mutex, DeltaValueSpace::mutex, and DeltaIndex::mutex. Determine which accesses can safely use shared_mutex, then benchmark read-heavy behavior and verify correctness; done should include measured performance improvement without regressions.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- cpp
- Domain
- performance
- Issue type
- Refactor
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100