-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 252
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(sdk): Event cache experimental store: LinkedChunk
#3166
feat(sdk): Event cache experimental store: LinkedChunk
#3166
Conversation
a2fc51a
to
eeeca2d
Compare
7a00876
to
3b4ef21
Compare
3470f18
to
9b815dd
Compare
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.
Great stuff! A first round of comments here. I'm mostly worried about the naming conventions for the iterators, as I'm 100% sure I'm going to get them wrong; let's see if the renaming proposal below makes sense. Thanks for all the tests <3
1d2dc08
to
4ec21e8
Compare
bf60cf0
to
743b4fd
Compare
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.
Thanks for renaming the iterators 🫶
LGTM, let's ship this so we can move foreward forward with the integration!
items: I, | ||
chunk_identifier: ChunkIdentifier, | ||
) -> Result<(), LinkedChunkError> | ||
where | ||
I: IntoIterator<Item = T>, | ||
I::IntoIter: ExactSizeIterator, |
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.
(Nothing to action here, just a FYI: note we may need something slightly different, since the back-pagination replaces a gap with the events returned by the back-pagination and a previous gap, if there was another previous-token in the back-pagination response.)
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.
Well, we can use replace_gap_at
+ insert_gap_at
then?
743b4fd
to
4cc13a9
Compare
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #3166 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 83.76% 83.69% -0.08%
==========================================
Files 234 235 +1
Lines 24174 24467 +293
==========================================
+ Hits 20249 20477 +228
- Misses 3925 3990 +65 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
12cd505
to
97ccf5c
Compare
This patch is a work-in-progress. It explores an experimental data structure to store events in an efficient way. Note: in this comment, I will use the term _store_ to mean _database_ or _storage_. The biggest constraint is the following: events can be ordered in multiple ways, either topological order, or sync order. The problem is that, when syncing events (with `/sync`), or when fetching events (with `/messages`), we **don't know** how to order the newly received events compared to the already downloaded events. A reconciliation algorithm must be written (see matrix-org#3058). However, from the “storage” point of view, events must be read, written and re-ordered efficiently. The simplest approach would be to use an `order_index` for example. Every time a new event is inserted, it uses the position of the last event, increments it by one, and done. However, inserting a new event in _the middle_ of existing events would shift all events on one side of the insertion point: given `a`, `b`, `c`, `d`, `e`, `f` with `f` being the most recent event, if `g` needs to be inserted between `b` and `c`, then `c`, `d`, `e`, `f`'s ordering positions need to be shifted. That's not optimal at all as it would imply a lot of updates in the store. Example of a relational database: | ordering_index | event | |----------------|-------| | 0 | `a` | | 1 | `b` | | 2 | `g` | | 3 | `c` | | … | … | An insertion can be O(n), and it can happen more frequently than one can think of. Let's imagine a permalink to an old message: the user opens it, a couple of events are fetched (with `/messages`), and these events must be inserted in the store, thus potentially shifting a lot of existing events. Another example: Imagine the SDK has a search API for events; as long as no search result is found, the SDK will back-paginate until reaching the beginning of the room; every time there is a back-pagination, a block of events will be inserted: there is more and more events to shift at each back-pagination. OK, let's forget the `order_index`. Let's use a linked list then? Each event has a _link_ to the _previous_ and to the _next_ event. Inserting an event would be at worst O(3) in this case: if the previous event exists, it must be updated, if the next event exists, it must be updated, finally, insert the new event. Example with a relational database: | previous | id | event | next | |----------|---------|-------|---------| | null | `id(a)` | `a` | `id(b)` | | `id(a)` | `id(b)` | `b` | `id(c)` | | `id(b)` | `id(c)` | `c` | null | This approach ensures a fast _writing_, but a terribly slow _reading_. Indeed, reading N events require N queries in the store. Events aren't contiguous in the store, and cannot be ordered by the database engine (e.g. with `ORDER BY` for SQL-based database). So it really requires one query per event. That's a no-go. In the two scenarios above, another problem arises. How to represent a gap? Indeed, when new events are synced (via `/sync`), sometimes the response contains a `limited` flag, which means that the results are _partial_. Let's take the following example: the store contains `a`, `b`, `c`. After a long offline period (during which the room has been pretty active), a sync is started, which provides the following events: `x`, `y`, `z` + the _limited_ flag. The app is killed and reopened later. The event cache store will contain `a`, `b`, `c`, `x`, `y`, `z`. How do we know that there is a hole/a gap between `c` and `x`? This is an important information! When `z`, `y` and `x` are displayed, and the user would like to scroll up, the SDK must know that it must back-paginate before providing `c`, `b` and `a`. So the data structure we use must also represent gaps. This information is also crucial for the events reconciliation algorithm. What about a mix between the two? Here is _Linked Chunk_. A _linked chunk_ is like a linked list, except that each node is either a _Gap_ or an _Items_. A _Gap_ contains nothing, it's just a gap. An _Items_ contains _several_ events. A node is called a _Chunk_. A _chunk_ has a maximum size, which is called a _capacity_. When a chunk is full, a new chunk is created and linked appropriately. Inside a chunk, an ordering index is used to order events. At this point, it becomes a trade-off the find the appropriate chunk size to balance the performance between reading and writing. Nonetheless, if the chunk size is 50, then reading events is 50 times more efficient with a linked chunk than with a linked list, and writing events is at worst O(49), compare to the O(n - 1) of the ordering index. Example with a relational database. First table is `events`, second table is `chunks`. | chunk id | index | event | |----------|-------|-------| | `$0` | 0 | `a` | | `$0` | 1 | `b` | | `$0` | 2 | `c` | | `$0` | 3 | `d` | | `$2` | 0 | `e` | | `$2` | 1 | `f` | | `$2` | 2 | `g` | | `$2` | 3 | `h` | | chunk id | type | previous | next | |----------|-------|----------|------| | `$0` | items | null | `$1` | | `$1` | gap | `$0` | `$2` | | `$2` | items | `$1` | null | Reading the last chunk consists of reading all events where the `chunk_id` is `$2` for example, and contains events `e`, `f`, `g` and `h`. We can sort them easily by using the `event_index` column. The previous chunk is a gap. The previous chunk contains events `a`, `b`, `c` and `d`. Being able to read events by chunk clearly limit the amount of reading and writing in the store. It is also close to what will be really done in real life with this store. It also allows to represent gaps. We can replace a gap by new chunk pretty easily with few writings. A summary: | Data structure | Reading | Writing | |----------------|-------------------|-----------------| | Ordering index | “O(1)”[^1] (fast) | O(n - 1) (slow) | | Linked list | O(n) (slow) | O(3) (fast) | | Linked chunk | O(n / capacity) | O(capacity - 1) | This patch contains a draft implementation of a linked chunk. It will strictly only contain the required API for the `EventCache`, understand it _is not_ designed as a generic data structure type. [^1]: O(1) because it's simply one query to run; the database engine does the sorting for us in a very efficient way, particularly if the `ordering_index` is an unsigned integer.
9596e74
to
e8cf6dc
Compare
LinkedChunk
This PR is a work-in-progress. It explores an experimental data structure to store events in an efficient way.
Note: in this comment, I will use the term store to mean database or storage.
The biggest constraint is the following: events can be ordered in multiple ways, either topological order, or sync order. The problem is that, when syncing events (with
/sync
), or when fetching events (with/messages
), we don't know how to order the newly received events compared to the already downloaded events. A reconciliation algorithm must be written (see #3058). However, from the “storage” point of view, events must be read, written and re-ordered efficiently.Ordering index
The simplest approach would be to use an
order_index
for example. Every time a new event is inserted, it uses the position of the last event, increments it by one, and done.However, inserting a new event in the middle of existing events would shift all events on one side of the insertion point: given
a
,b
,c
,d
,e
,f
withf
being the most recent event, ifg
needs to be inserted betweenb
andc
, thenc
,d
,e
,f
's ordering positions need to be shifted. That's not optimal at all as it would imply a lot of updates in the store.Example of a relational database:
a
b
g
c
An insertion can be O(n), and it can happen more frequently than one can think of. Let's imagine a permalink to an old message: the user opens it, a couple of events are fetched (with
/messages
), and these events must be inserted in the store, thus potentially shifting a lot of existing events. Another example: Imagine the SDK has a search API for events; as long as no search result is found, the SDK will back-paginate until reaching the beginning of the room; every time there is a back-pagination, a block of events will be inserted: there is more and more events to shift at each back-pagination.Linked list
OK, let's forget the
order_index
. Let's use a linked list then? Each event has a link to the previous and to the next event.Inserting an event would be at worst O(3) in this case: if the previous event exists, it must be updated, if the next event exists, it must be updated, finally, insert the new event.
Example with a relational database:
id(a)
a
id(b)
id(a)
id(b)
b
id(c)
id(b)
id(c)
c
This approach ensures a fast writing, but a terribly slow reading. Indeed, reading N events require N queries in the store. Events aren't contiguous in the store, and cannot be ordered by the database engine (e.g. with
ORDER BY
for SQL-based database). So it really requires one query per event. That's a no-go.What about gap?
In the two scenarios above, another problem arises. How to represent a gap? Indeed, when new events are synced (via
/sync
), sometimes the response contains alimited
flag, which means that the results are partial.Let's take the following example: the store contains
a
,b
,c
. After a long offline period (during which the room has been pretty active), a sync is started, which provides the following events:x
,y
,z
+ the limited flag. The app is killed and reopened later. The event cache store will containa
,b
,c
,x
,y
,z
. How do we know that there is a hole/a gap betweenc
andx
? This is an important information! Whenz
,y
andx
are displayed, and the user would like to scroll up, the SDK must know that it must back-paginate before providingc
,b
anda
.So the data structure we use must also represent gaps. This information is also crucial for the events reconciliation algorithm.
Proposal
What about a mix between the two? Here is Linked Chunk.
A linked chunk is like a linked list, except that each node is either a Gap or an Items. A Gap contains nothing, it's just a gap. An Items contains several events. A node is called a Chunk. A chunk has a maximum size, which is called a capacity. When a chunk is full, a new chunk is created and linked appropriately. Inside a chunk, an ordering index is used to order events. At this point, it becomes a trade-off the find the appropriate chunk size to balance the performance between reading and writing. Nonetheless, if the chunk size is 50, then reading events is 50 times more efficient with a linked chunk than with a linked list, and writing events is at worst O(49), compare to the O(n - 1) of the ordering index.
Example with a relational database. First table is
events
, second table ischunks
.$0
a
$0
b
$0
c
$0
d
$2
e
$2
f
$2
g
$2
h
$0
$1
$1
$0
$2
$2
$1
Reading the last chunk consists of reading all events where the
chunk_id
is$2
for example, and contains eventse
,f
,g
andh
. We can sort them easily by using theevent_index
column. The previous chunk is a gap. The previous chunk contains eventsa
,b
,c
andd
.Being able to read events by chunk clearly limit the amount of reading and writing in the store. It is also close to what will be really done in real life with this store. It also allows to represent gaps. We can replace a gap by new chunk pretty easily with few writings.
A summary:
Implementation
This PR contains a draft implementation of a linked chunk. It will strictly only contain the required API for the
EventCache
, understand it is not designed as a generic data structure type.Footnotes
O(1) because it's simply one query to run; the database engine does the sorting for us in a very efficient way, particularly if the
ordering_index
is an unsigned integer. ↩