feat: in-memory LRU email body cache#1281
Open
mavonx wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What?
Replaces the disk-only email body cache with an in-memory LRU cache backed by write-through disk persistence.
sync.Oncesingleton.Get()andPut()operations —O(1)via hashmap + doubly-linked list.Get()andPut()immediately persists to disk, so no data is lost on crash.GetLRUInstance()call,LoadFromDisk()restores LRU order usingLastAccessedAttimestamps sorted oldest-first, so the most recently accessed email ends up at the front.Why?
The previous disk-only approach had two bottlenecks:
GetCachedEmailBody()read the entire folder JSON file on every call, andpruneEmailBodyCacheSize()loaded all folder files on everySaveEmailBody()call. With multiple accounts and many folders, this becomes expensive.Related #1171