The proposal looks good to me. -Val
On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 2:24 AM Ivan Daschinsky <ivanda...@gmail.com> wrote: > I suppose, that general idea is great. Some details are missing, but I > suppose during implementation of clients we will add more details and > redefine some parts. > > вт, 6 июл. 2021 г., 09:59 Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupit...@apache.org>: > > > Ivan, Val, and others - are there any open objections or questions? > > Can we accept the proposal? > > > > On Mon, Jul 5, 2021 at 1:28 PM Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupit...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > Igniters, > > > > > > I've updated the IEP to support "Live Schema" [1] from IEP-54. > > > Some operations now have schemaless variants, where tuples are > serialized > > > as maps (String -> val). > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-54%3A+Schema-first+Approach#IEP54:SchemafirstApproach-Dynamicschemaexpansion(Live-schema) > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 8:31 PM Ivan Daschinsky <ivanda...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> Val, my understanding about it was exactly the same as yours, but, > > again, > > >> I > > >> heard a different opinion. > > >> > > >> But nevertheless, binary protocol should not be about objects, records > > aka > > >> tuples are the best varii, simple and powerful. > > >> > > >> As for me, I want to take part in implementing python and golang thin > > >> clients for ignite 3, so consider my remarks using this info. I am not > > >> just > > >> a rude critic, > > >> I am just interested in consice and universal binary prorocol > > >> чт, 1 июл. 2021 г., 20:23 Valentin Kulichenko < > > >> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com > > >> >: > > >> > > >> > Ivan, > > >> > > > >> > KV view does work over the tuples. Nested objects and arbitrary > > >> structures > > >> > can be stored as blobs. So if you need a basic KV cache, you can > > always > > >> > create a table with two blob fields - one for key and one for value > - > > >> and > > >> > store anything there. > > >> > > > >> > -Val > > >> > > > >> > On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 9:55 AM Ivan Daschinsky <ivanda...@gmail.com > > > > >> > wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > Val, am I right, that kv view over the tuples is just simple > mapping > > >> from > > >> > > POJO to tuple? No collections, no nested objects? I have discussed > > >> this > > >> > in > > >> > > private with Igor and Pavel and they told me different info. > > >> > > > > >> > > чт, 1 июл. 2021 г., 19:43 Valentin Kulichenko < > > >> > > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com > > >> > > >: > > >> > > > > >> > > > Ivan, > > >> > > > > > >> > > > I was answering your question about the KV API. The API I > provided > > >> has > > >> > > been > > >> > > > discussed and agreed upon. One of the goals of the protocol is > to > > >> > > implement > > >> > > > this API, so it should give you a clear idea of what we're > looking > > >> for. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Of course, I agree with you that the protocol should be simple > and > > >> > > flexible > > >> > > > enough to allow other implementations for different languages > and > > >> > > > platforms. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > -Val > > >> > > > > > >> > > > On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 9:38 AM Ivan Daschinsky < > > ivanda...@gmail.com > > >> > > > >> > > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Andrey, yep, you are right. This was just a quick idea. As for > > >> me, I > > >> > > just > > >> > > > > don't want to repeat the same problem with compactFooter in > thin > > >> > client > > >> > > > api > > >> > > > > of ignite 2.x. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > чт, 1 июл. 2021 г., 19:22 Andrey Mashenkov < > > >> > andrey.mashen...@gmail.com > > >> > > >: > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I suppose that we should describe this more verbose and > > >> > explicit. I > > >> > > > > > > nevertheless suggest to also consider writing values this > > way: > > >> > > > > > > - arr of fields names (if name is missed, corresponding > > field > > >> is > > >> > > nil) > > >> > > > > > > - arr of rows (row as array, length equal to fields array) > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > Ivan, > > >> > > > > > I think GET and PUT operation parameters should be > consistent. > > >> > > > > > With PUT operation this way may be tricky. > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > SQL INSERT operation (which is similar PUT operation) > semantic > > >> > allows > > >> > > > > > skipping columns that have a default value. > > >> > > > > > Assume we have smth like this: > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > CREATE TABLE t1 ( > > >> > > > > > 'id' INT; > > >> > > > > > 'colname' VARCHAR DEFAULT "abc"; > > >> > > > > > ) > > >> > > > > > INSERT INTO t1 VALUES(1) > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > Actually, this will add a row (1, "abc") > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > Your suggestion related to missed fields will not work this > > way > > >> as > > >> > it > > >> > > > is > > >> > > > > > impossible to distinct > > >> > > > > > case with 'null' value from the case with a default value. > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 5:51 PM Ivan Daschinsky < > > >> > ivanda...@gmail.com> > > >> > > > > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Here is the description of TUPLE_GET_ALL: > > >> > > > > > > - UUID: table ID > > >> > > > > > > - int: schema ID > > >> > > > > > > - arr of arr: array of rows with values for all columns in > > >> given > > >> > > > schema > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I suppose that we should describe this more verbose and > > >> > explicit. I > > >> > > > > > > nevertheless suggest to also consider writing values this > > way: > > >> > > > > > > - arr of fields names (if name is missed, corresponding > > field > > >> is > > >> > > nil) > > >> > > > > > > - arr of rows (row as array, length equal to fields array) > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > It is quite simple and if we use str8 (it is more than > > enough > > >> for > > >> > > any > > >> > > > > > utf-8 > > >> > > > > > > reasonable field name), overhead will be negligible, but > > >> > > realization > > >> > > > > of a > > >> > > > > > > client will be way simpler > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > чт, 1 июл. 2021 г., 16:57 Pavel Tupitsyn < > > >> ptupit...@apache.org>: > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > No it isn't, I have carefully read code and IEP, in > your > > >> code > > >> > > you > > >> > > > > > write > > >> > > > > > > > > schema id in each tuple. > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > There is no code for batch operations yet. > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Here is the description of TUPLE_GET_ALL: > > >> > > > > > > > - UUID: table ID > > >> > > > > > > > - int: schema ID > > >> > > > > > > > - arr of arr: array of rows with values for all columns > in > > >> > given > > >> > > > > schema > > >> > > > > > > > (nil when value is missing for a column) > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > As you can see, schema ID is written once for all rows. > > >> > > > > > > > A row is just a set of values according to the schema. > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Also, my biggest concern -- extra serde step. I > suppose > > we > > >> > > should > > >> > > > > > pass > > >> > > > > > > > > bytearray to internal api, and use msgpack throughout > > all > > >> > wire > > >> > > > > > > protocols, > > >> > > > > > > > > as tarantool does. > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > I agree. But this was decided before in IEP-54, and is > out > > >> of > > >> > > scope > > >> > > > > for > > >> > > > > > > > current IEP. > > >> > > > > > > > Would you like to start a separate thread to discuss > this? > > >> Or I > > >> > > can > > >> > > > > do > > >> > > > > > > this > > >> > > > > > > > a bit later. > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 4:41 PM Ivan Daschinsky < > > >> > > > ivanda...@gmail.com> > > >> > > > > > > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > This is described in all operations that include > > >> multiple > > >> > > > tuples. > > >> > > > > > > > > No it isn't, I have carefully read code and IEP, in > your > > >> code > > >> > > you > > >> > > > > > write > > >> > > > > > > > > schema id in each tuple. > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Also, my biggest concern -- extra serde step. I > suppose > > we > > >> > > should > > >> > > > > > pass > > >> > > > > > > > > bytearray to internal api, and use msgpack throughout > > all > > >> > wire > > >> > > > > > > protocols, > > >> > > > > > > > > as tarantool does. > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > чт, 1 июл. 2021 г., 16:15 Pavel Tupitsyn < > > >> > ptupit...@apache.org > > >> > > >: > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Ivan, > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > that there is not neccesary to write schema > > versions > > >> in > > >> > > each > > >> > > > > row > > >> > > > > > > > > > > in collectionof tuples > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > This is described in all operations that include > > >> multiple > > >> > > > tuples. > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > it is not clear from your code (probably > > >> > > > > > > > > > > mistake?) how differ key tuples and value tuples > > from > > >> > each > > >> > > > > other > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Key tuples include only key columns. Key columns > come > > >> first > > >> > > in > > >> > > > > the > > >> > > > > > > > > schema. > > >> > > > > > > > > > Value tuples include all columns, key and value. > Added > > >> "Key > > >> > > > > tuples" > > >> > > > > > > > > > section. > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > As for me, these excercises with schema's doesn't > > >> worth a > > >> > > lot > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > I'll add a benchmark and we'll see. > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 3:17 PM Ivan Daschinsky < > > >> > > > > > ivanda...@gmail.com> > > >> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > I suppose, that there is not neccesary to write > > schema > > >> > > > versions > > >> > > > > > in > > >> > > > > > > > each > > >> > > > > > > > > > row > > >> > > > > > > > > > > in collectionof tuples. Also it is not clear from > > your > > >> > code > > >> > > > > > > (probably > > >> > > > > > > > > > > mistake?) how differ key tuples and value tuples > > from > > >> > each > > >> > > > > other. > > >> > > > > > > In > > >> > > > > > > > > > > readTuple you always read full schema and check > for > > >> full > > >> > > > > length. > > >> > > > > > As > > >> > > > > > > > for > > >> > > > > > > > > > me, > > >> > > > > > > > > > > these excercises with schema's doesn't worth a > lot. > > >> I.e. > > >> > > > > postgres > > >> > > > > > > > just > > >> > > > > > > > > > > writes field names and then simpy rows with data. > > >> Saving > > >> > > few > > >> > > > > > bytes > > >> > > > > > > > > > doesn't > > >> > > > > > > > > > > make much deal. Btw, msgpack has special types for > > >> short > > >> > > > > strings > > >> > > > > > > > (i.e. > > >> > > > > > > > > > > str8). It is much easier use it and write field > name > > >> as > > >> > is. > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > чт, 1 июл. 2021 г., 14:56 Pavel Tupitsyn < > > >> > > > ptupit...@apache.org > > >> > > > > >: > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Ivan, tuple serialization section added to the > > IEP, > > >> let > > >> > > me > > >> > > > > know > > >> > > > > > > if > > >> > > > > > > > it > > >> > > > > > > > > > is > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > clear enough. > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 2:06 PM Ivan Daschinsky < > > >> > > > > > > > ivanda...@gmail.com> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > I can't find any description of tuple > > >> serialization > > >> > in > > >> > > > IEP, > > >> > > > > > > only > > >> > > > > > > > in > > >> > > > > > > > > > > code > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > чт, 1 июл. 2021 г., 13:59 Pavel Tupitsyn < > > >> > > > > > ptupit...@apache.org > > >> > > > > > > >: > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ivan, > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0. The IEP is not in progress, it is ready > for > > >> > review > > >> > > > and > > >> > > > > > > > > > discussion. > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Tuple serialization is described in the > IEP > > >> and > > >> > > > > > > demonstrated > > >> > > > > > > > > in > > >> > > > > > > > > > > the > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > PoC > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > (see ClientMessageHandler#readTuple), let me > > >> know > > >> > if > > >> > > > more > > >> > > > > > > > details > > >> > > > > > > > > > are > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > required > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. Tuple schema serialization is described > in > > >> > > > SCHEMAS_GET > > >> > > > > > > > > section. > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Table > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > schema (configuration) needs more details, > you > > >> are > > >> > > > right > > >> > > > > - > > >> > > > > > > I'll > > >> > > > > > > > > add > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > them. > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. This IEP is about tables (tuple-based) > API > > >> only, > > >> > > > since > > >> > > > > > it > > >> > > > > > > is > > >> > > > > > > > > the > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > only > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > API that we have right now, as noted in > Risks > > >> and > > >> > > > > > > Assumptions. > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 1:53 PM Ivan > > Daschinsky < > > >> > > > > > > > > > ivanda...@gmail.com> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, is there any clear information about > > KV > > >> > api? > > >> > > Is > > >> > > > > > there > > >> > > > > > > > any > > >> > > > > > > > > > > plan > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > to > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > implement it? Or is there any proposal > about > > >> it? > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > чт, 1 июл. 2021 г., 13:51 Ivan Daschinsky > < > > >> > > > > > > > ivanda...@gmail.com > > >> > > > > > > > > >: > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pavel, but IEP is in progress, isn't it? > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. There is not any information about > > tuple > > >> > > > > > > serialization. > > >> > > > > > > > > And > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > there > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > isn't > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a clear consensus about it. > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. There is not any information about > > schrma > > >> > > > > > > serialization > > >> > > > > > > > > > > format. > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > And > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > AFAIK, there isn't a clear consensus > also. > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > чт, 1 июл. 2021 г., 13:26 Pavel > Tupitsyn < > > >> > > > > > > > > ptupit...@apache.org > > >> > > > > > > > > > >: > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Igniters, > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Please review the IEP for thin client > > >> protocol > > >> > > in > > >> > > > > 3.0 > > >> > > > > > > [1]. > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> PoC is in progress [2] > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> [1] > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-76+Thin+Client+Protocol+for+Ignite+3.0 > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> [2] > > >> > https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/pull/191 > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > -- > > >> > > > > > Best regards, > > >> > > > > > Andrey V. Mashenkov > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >
