couchdb-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From kocol...@apache.org
Subject [couchdb-documentation] 01/01: Draft of all_docs and dbinfo, still WIP
Date Wed, 17 Apr 2019 17:07:39 GMT
This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.

kocolosk pushed a commit to branch rfc/005-all-docs-index
in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/couchdb-documentation.git

commit 70f4b5c7f58fd40c9f66337009c87f4152e798ce
Author: Adam Kocoloski <kocolosk@apache.org>
AuthorDate: Wed Apr 17 13:07:20 2019 -0400

    Draft of all_docs and dbinfo, still WIP
---
 rfcs/005-all-docs-index.md | 207 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 207 insertions(+)

diff --git a/rfcs/005-all-docs-index.md b/rfcs/005-all-docs-index.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c368e5a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/rfcs/005-all-docs-index.md
@@ -0,0 +1,207 @@
+---
+name: Formal RFC
+about: Submit a formal Request For Comments for consideration by the team.
+title: Implementation of _all_docs DB info metadata in FoundationDB
+labels: rfc, discussion
+assignees: ''
+
+---
+
+# Introduction
+
+## Abstract
+
+This document describes how to maintain an index of all the documents in a
+database backed by FoundationDB, one sufficient to power the _all_docs endpoint.
+It also addresses the individual metadata fields included in the response to a
+GET /dbname request.
+
+## Requirements Language
+
+[NOTE]: # ( Do not alter the section below. Follow its instructions. )
+
+The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
+"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED",  "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
+document are to be interpreted as described in
+[RFC 2119](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt).
+
+## Terminology
+
+[TIP]:  # ( Provide a list of any unique terms or acronyms, and their definitions here.)
+
+---
+
+# Detailed Description
+
+## _all_docs
+
+Normal requests to the `_all_docs` index will be powered by a dedicated subspace
+containing a single key for each document in the database that has at least one
+deleted=false entry in the revisions subspace. This dedicated subspace can be
+populated by blind writes on each update transaction, as the revisions subspace
+ensures proper coordination of concurrent writers trying to modify the same
+document. The structure of the keys in this space looks like
+
+```
+(?BY_ID, DocID) = (ValueFormat, RevPosition, RevHash)
+```
+
+where the individual elements are defined as follows:
+
+* ValueFormat: enum for the value encoding, to enable schema evolution
+* DocID: the document ID
+* RevPosition: positive integer encoded using standard tuple layer encoding
+* RevHash: 16 bytes uniquely identifying the winning revision of this document
+
+If a transaction deletes the last "live" edit branch of a document, it must also
+clear the corresponding entry for the document from this subspace.
+
+A request that specifies `include_docs=true` can be implemented either by
+performing a range request against this subspace and then N additional range
+requests explicitly specifying the full revision information in the ?DOCS
+subspace, or by doing a full range scan directly against that subspace,
+discarding conflict bodies and any user data associated with deleted revisions.
+As the implementation choice there has no bearing on the actual data model we
+leave it unspecified in this RFC.
+
+## dbinfo
+
+The so-called "dbinfo" JSON object contains various bits of metadata about a
+database. Here's how we'll carry those forward:
+
+`db_name`: should be trivially accessible.
+
+`doc_count`: this will be maintained as a single key mutated using
+FoundationDB's atomic operations. Transactions that create a new document or
+re-create one where all previous edit branches had been deleted should increment
+the counter by 1.
+
+`doc_del_count`: as above, this is a key mutated using atomic operations.
+Transactions that tombstone the last deleted=false edit branch on a document
+should increment it by 1. Transactions that add a new deleted=false edit branch
+to a document where all previous edit branches were deleted must decrement it by
+1.
+
+The revisions model ensures that every transaction has enough information to
+know whether it needs to modify either or both of the above counters.
+
+`update_seq`: the most efficient way to retrieve this value is to execute a
+`get_key` operation using a `last_less_than` KeySelector on the end of the
+?CHANGES subspace, so no additional writes are required.
+
+`purge_seq`: TBD on a more detailed design for purge. If it ends up being
+entirely transactional then this could be fixed to `update_seq` or dropped
+entirely.
+
+### Data Sizes
+
+There are three distinct sizes that we currently track for every database:
+
+* `sizes.external`: described as the "number of bytes that would be required to
+  represent the contents outside of the database".
+* `sizes.active`: a theoretical minimum number of bytes to store this database
+  on disk.
+* `sizes.file`: the current number of bytes on disk.
+
+The relationship between `sizes.active` and `sizes.file` is used to guide
+decisions on database compaction. FoundationDB doesn't require compaction, and
+any distinction that might exist between these two quantities (e.g. from storage
+engine compression) is not surfaced up to the clients, so it probably doesn't
+make sense to have both.
+
+The current implementation of `sizes.external` does *not* measure the length of
+a JSON representation of the data, but rather the size of an uncompressed Erlang
+term representation of the JSON. This is a somewhat awkward choice as the
+internal Erlang term representation is liable to change over time (e.g. with the
+introduction of Maps in newer Erlang releases, or plausibly even a JSON decoder
+that directly emits the format defined in the document storage RFC).
+
+Assuming we can agree on a set of sizes and how they should be calculated, the
+implementation will require two pieces: a single key for each size, mutated by
+atomic operations, and a record of the size of each revision in the ?REVISIONS
+subpsace so that a transaction can compute the delta for each document.
+
+### Clustering
+
+The `r`, `w`, `q`, and `n` values in the `cluster` object were introduced in
+CouchDB 2.x to describe the topology of a database and the default quorum
+settings for operations against it. If we wanted to bring these forward, here's
+how they'd be defined:
+
+* `r`: always fixed at 1
+
+* `w`: interpreted as the number of transaction logs that record a commit, this
+  is dependent on the `redundancy mode` for the underlying FoundationDB database
+
+* `n`: interpreted as number of storage servers that host a key, this is also
+  dependent on the `redundancy mode` for the underlying FoundationDB database
+
+* `q`: the closest analogue here would be to use the `get_boundary_keys` API and
+  report number of distinct ranges implied by the boundary keys
+
+This interpretation could lead to some surprises, though. For example, "r=1,
+w=4, n=3" is a popular configuration, but this is nonsensical for someone
+expecting to see Dynamo-style numbers. Ignoring backwards compatibility, the
+sensible thing is to point users toward the actual FoundationDB configuration
+information, and to deprecate this entire `cluster` object. Open for discussion.
+
+# Advantages and Disadvantages
+
+[NOTE]: # ( Briefly, list the benefits and drawbacks that would be realized should )
+[NOTE]: # ( the proposal be accepted for inclusion into Apache CouchDB. )
+
+# Key Changes
+
+The underlying transaction in FoundationDB must complete within 5 seconds, which
+implicitly limits the number of results that can be returned in a single
+_all_docs invocation.
+
+## Applications and Modules affected
+
+TBD depending on exact code layout going forward.
+
+## HTTP API additions
+
+None.
+
+## HTTP API deprecations
+
+The `total_rows` and `offset` fields are removed from the response to
+`_all_docs`, which now has the simpler form
+
+    {"rows": [
+        {"id":"foo", "key":"foo", "value":{"rev":"1-deadbeef..."}},
+        ...
+    ]}
+
+The following fields are removed in the dbinfo response:
+
+* `compact_running`
+
+* `disk_format_version`: this is a tricky one. We define "format versions" for
+  every single type of key we're storing in FoundationDB, and those versions
+  could vary on a key-by-key basis, so listing a single number for an entire
+  database is sort of ill-posed. 
+
+
+The following fields are already marked as deprecated and can be removed in the
+next major release, independent of the FoundationDB work:
+
+* `instance_start_time`
+* `other`
+* `data_size`
+* `disk_size`
+
+
+# Security Considerations
+
+None have been identified.
+
+# References
+
+[TIP]:  # ( Include any references to CouchDB documentation, mailing list discussion, )
+[TIP]:  # ( external standards or other links here. )
+
+# Acknowledgements
+
+[TIP]:  # ( Who helped you write this RFC? )
\ No newline at end of file


Mime
View raw message