-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 489
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
feat(store)!: Support for different key layout #2327
Conversation
@@ -58,6 +58,8 @@ type BlockStore struct { | |||
mtx cmtsync.RWMutex | |||
base int64 | |||
height int64 | |||
|
|||
dbKeyLayout BlockKeyLayout |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Am I wrong in thinking that the BlockStore
API is at a too low abstraction level to be effectively implemented in all suitable database backends?
It assumes a global key-value store and segregates relations with prefixes, while using multiple separate KV trees (if supported by the DB engine, which exist in the wild) might allow tuning specifically for different logical data tables. In particular, this API rules out an efficient SQL implementation.
This is an architectural musing, not necessarily calling for action in this PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@mzabaluev that's something to keep in mind, for sure 👍 However, I'm skeptical about switching to an SQL DB (SQLite) in v1
as it requires planning, execution, and evaluation (benchmarking, testing). Maybe this is something we should examine when picking a single DB storage.
…for-two-key-layouts
…for-two-key-layouts
…for-two-key-layouts
…for-two-key-layouts
Co-authored-by: Anton Kaliaev <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
👍
@mergify backport v1.x |
✅ Backports have been created
|
Closes #2057 , #1041 If we keep the current design, we are also closing #1822 Supersedes #1764 This PR implements support for an additional DB key representation. The different key layout sorts the entries by height instead of lexicographically as in the current version of Comet. When starting this work, we hoped that the new layout would significantly outperform the current layout. As we do not have sufficient real world evidence for this, this PR introduces a DB key layout interface that would allow Comet to easily integrate a more preferential key representation without major breaking changes. The layout using ordercode is introduced as experimental, allowing users to easily experiment with this. This layout was thoroughly tested as part of #1044 and all results will be in a report closing the mentioned PR. Locally tested: - Empty stores get initialized with v2 - Existing stores without a version key get initialized to v1 and the key is set - When a nodes' stores are deleted and we boot it up again that node uses v2 while the rest of the nodes use v1 <!-- Please add a reference to the issue that this PR addresses and indicate which files are most critical to review. If it fully addresses a particular issue, please include "Closes #XXX" (where "XXX" is the issue number). If this PR is non-trivial/large/complex, please ensure that you have either created an issue that the team's had a chance to respond to, or had some discussion with the team prior to submitting substantial pull requests. The team can be reached via GitHub Discussions or the Cosmos Network Discord server in the #cometbft channel. GitHub Discussions is preferred over Discord as it allows us to keep track of conversations topically. https://github.com/cometbft/cometbft/discussions If the work in this PR is not aligned with the team's current priorities, please be advised that it may take some time before it is merged - especially if it has not yet been discussed with the team. See the project board for the team's current priorities: https://github.com/orgs/cometbft/projects/1 --> --- #### PR checklist - [x] Tests written/updated - [x] Changelog entry added in `.changelog` (we use [unclog](https://github.com/informalsystems/unclog) to manage our changelog) - [ ] Updated relevant documentation (`docs/` or `spec/`) and code comments - [x] Title follows the [Conventional Commits](https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/) spec --------- Co-authored-by: Anton Kaliaev <[email protected]> (cherry picked from commit 55638e8)
Closes #2057 , #1041 If we keep the current design, we are also closing #1822 Supersedes #1764 This PR implements support for an additional DB key representation. The different key layout sorts the entries by height instead of lexicographically as in the current version of Comet. When starting this work, we hoped that the new layout would significantly outperform the current layout. As we do not have sufficient real world evidence for this, this PR introduces a DB key layout interface that would allow Comet to easily integrate a more preferential key representation without major breaking changes. The layout using ordercode is introduced as experimental, allowing users to easily experiment with this. This layout was thoroughly tested as part of #1044 and all results will be in a report closing the mentioned PR. Locally tested: - Empty stores get initialized with v2 - Existing stores without a version key get initialized to v1 and the key is set - When a nodes' stores are deleted and we boot it up again that node uses v2 while the rest of the nodes use v1 --- #### PR checklist - [x] Tests written/updated - [x] Changelog entry added in `.changelog` (we use [unclog](https://github.com/informalsystems/unclog) to manage our changelog) - [ ] Updated relevant documentation (`docs/` or `spec/`) and code comments - [x] Title follows the [Conventional Commits](https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/) spec <hr>This is an automatic backport of pull request #2327 done by [Mergify](https://mergify.com). Co-authored-by: Jasmina Malicevic <[email protected]>
Closes #2057 , #1041
If we keep the current design, we are also closing #1822
Supersedes #1764
This PR implements support for an additional DB key representation. The different key layout sorts the entries by height instead of lexicographically as in the current version of Comet.
When starting this work, we hoped that the new layout would significantly outperform the current layout. As we do not have sufficient real world evidence for this, this PR introduces a DB key layout interface that would allow Comet to easily integrate a more preferential key representation without major breaking changes.
The layout using ordercode is introduced as experimental, allowing users to easily experiment with this.
This layout was thoroughly tested as part of #1044 and all results will be in a report closing the mentioned PR.
Locally tested:
PR checklist
.changelog
(we use unclog to manage our changelog)docs/
orspec/
) and code comments