BlakeOrth commented on code in PR #18855:
URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/18855#discussion_r2548182236


##########
datafusion/execution/src/cache/cache_unit.rs:
##########
@@ -111,64 +113,224 @@ impl CacheAccessor<Path, Arc<Statistics>> for 
DefaultFileStatisticsCache {
 ///
 /// Collected files metadata for listing files.
 ///
-/// Cache is not invalided until user calls [`Self::remove`] or 
[`Self::clear`].
+/// # Internal details
+///
+/// The `capacity` parameter controls the maximum number of entries in the 
cache, using a Least
+/// Recently Used eviction algorithm. When adding a new entry, if the total 
number of entries in
+/// the cache exceeds `capacity`, the least recently used entries are evicted 
until the total
+/// entries are lower than the `capacity`.
 ///
 /// [`ListFilesCache`]: crate::cache::cache_manager::ListFilesCache
 #[derive(Default)]
 pub struct DefaultListFilesCache {
-    statistics: DashMap<Path, Arc<Vec<ObjectMeta>>>,
+    state: Mutex<DefaultListFilesCacheState>,
+}
+
+impl DefaultListFilesCache {
+    pub fn new(capacity: usize, ttl: Duration) -> Self {
+        Self {
+            state: Mutex::new(DefaultListFilesCacheState::new(capacity, ttl)),
+        }
+    }
+
+    pub fn cache_limit(&self) -> usize {
+        self.state.lock().unwrap().capacity
+    }
+
+    pub fn cache_ttl(&self) -> Duration {
+        self.state.lock().unwrap().ttl
+    }
+}
+
+pub(super) const DEFAULT_LIST_FILES_CACHE_LIMIT: usize = 128 * 1024; // ~130k 
objects
+pub(super) const DEFAULT_LIST_FILES_CACHE_TTL: Duration = Duration::new(600, 
0); // 10min
+
+pub struct DefaultListFilesCacheState {
+    lru_queue: LruQueue<Path, (Arc<Vec<ObjectMeta>>, Instant)>,
+    capacity: usize, // TODO: do "bytes" matter here, or should we stick with 
"entries"?

Review Comment:
   I didn't feel like limiting this cache by "bytes" really made sense because 
the data stored in the cache is generally very uniform in size, perhaps aside 
from the path. I felt that it was probably small enough that simply limiting it 
by the number of entries should suffice, and "entries" seems like it would be 
easier for users to configure.



-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to