2014-09-21 06:48:20 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tango prototype TODO list
|
|
|
|
=========================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
__ The current checkpoint implementation is fundamentally broken and
|
|
|
|
needs a rewrite, or else.
|
2014-09-23 09:25:24 +00:00
|
|
|
This issue is not mentioned at all in the Tango paper.
|
|
|
|
|
2014-09-21 06:48:20 +00:00
|
|
|
option 1: fix checkpoint to be 100% correct
|
|
|
|
option 2: checkpointing is for the weak and the memory-constrained, so
|
|
|
|
don't bother. Instead, rip out the current checkpoint code,
|
|
|
|
period.
|
2014-09-23 09:25:24 +00:00
|
|
|
option 3: other
|
2014-09-21 06:48:20 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2014-09-23 09:25:24 +00:00
|
|
|
xx Checkpoint fix option #1: history splicing within the same OID?
|
2014-09-21 06:48:20 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2014-09-23 09:25:24 +00:00
|
|
|
xx Checkpoint fix option #2: checkpoint to a new OID, history writes to both
|
2014-09-21 06:48:20 +00:00
|
|
|
OIDs during the CP, then a marker in the old OID
|
|
|
|
to switch over to the new OID?
|
|
|
|
|
2014-09-23 09:25:24 +00:00
|
|
|
History splicing has a flaw that I belive just won't work. The switch to a
|
|
|
|
new OID has problems with updates written to the old OID before and before the
|
|
|
|
new checkpoint has finished.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I believe that a checkpoint where:
|
|
|
|
* all Tango writes, checkpoint and non-checkpoint alike, are noted with
|
|
|
|
a checkpoint number.
|
|
|
|
* that checkpoint number is strictly increasing
|
|
|
|
* a new checkpoint has a new checkpoint number
|
|
|
|
* scans ignore blocks with checkpoint numbers larger than the current
|
|
|
|
active checkpoint #, until the checkpoint is complete.
|
2014-09-21 06:48:20 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2014-09-23 09:25:24 +00:00
|
|
|
... ought to work correctly.
|