This adopts lazy crystallization in _addition_ to lazy grafting, managed
by separate LFS_o_UNCRYST and LFS_o_UNGRAFT flags:
LFS_o_UNCRYST 0x00400000 File's leaf not fully crystallized
LFS_o_UNGRAFT 0x00800000 File's leaf does not match bshrub/btree
This lets us graft not-fully-crystallized blocks into the tree without
needing to fully crystallize, avoiding repeated recrystallizations when
linearly rewriting a file.
Long story short, this gives file rewrites roughly the same performance
as linear file writes.
---
In theory you could also have fully crystallized but ungrafted blocks
(UNGRAFT + ~UNCRYST), but this doesn't happen with the current logic.
lfsr_file_crystallize eagerly grafts blocks once they're crystallized.
Internally, lfsr_file_crystallize replaces lfsr_file_graft for the
"don't care, gimme file->leaf" operation. This is analogous to
lfsr_file_flush for file->cache.
Note we do _not_ use LFS_o_UNCRYST to track erased-state! If we did,
erased-state wouldn't survive lfsr_file_flush!
---
Of course, this adds even more code. Fortunately not _that_ much
considering how many lines of code changed:
code stack ctx
before: 37012 2304 636
after 37084 (+0.2%) 2304 (+0.0%) 636 (+0.0%)
There is another downside however, and that's that our benchmarked disk
usage is slightly worse during random writes.
I haven't fully investigated this, but I think it's due to more
temporary fragments/blocks in the B-tree before flushing. This can cause
B-tree inner nodes to split earlier than when eagerly recrystallizing.
This also leads to higher disk usage pre-flush since we keep both the
old and new blocks around while uncrystallized, but since most rewrites
are probably going to be CoW on top of committed files, I don't think
this will be a big deal.
Note the disk usage ends up the same after lfsr_file_flush.
Christopher Haster
9c3a866508